RealGM

Yes, the NBA's salary cap and second apron have been criticized for making it harder to trade players and for potentially breaking up successful teams.

Concerns

Trade market
Some say the second apron makes it harder to trade players, which can inhibit the trade market.

Team building
The second apron can make it harder for teams to upgrade their rosters, which can lead to the breakup of successful teams.

Drafting
The second apron puts more pressure on teams to draft well and hit on their picks.

Player movement
Some say the second apron has had a profound effect on free agency and player movement.

Possible solutions
Allow teams to go above the second apron once more in four years

This would allow teams to delay their second apron clocks and avoid the draft penalty.

Protect homegrown teams
Consider only counting a portion of salaries from players drafted by their own teams toward the aprons

I was curious about the penalties and all the second apron talk so did a quick search, not sure how accurate this AI generated responses are but it hit on my biggest issue.

This system is intended to keep “ Super Teams “ from forming but it’s also punishing teams that draft well or hit on multiple players like us with Paolo and Franz.

Paolo , Franz, and Suggs will be taking a good portion of our cap, while we can exceed that salary cap by using their “Bird Rights” it doesn’t protect us from the second apron and all the other taxes and penalties. How does the NBA view this as fair?

It feels like you’re getting punished for doing what they want you to do, draft and grow your team organically while still sprinkling in some outside talent to give you a chance to win a championship. It’s absurd to think you could hit on several of your own draft picks and your picks can’t be paid the salary they have earned based of performance. This is a broken system.

They need to add some concesions for players who have been drafted by that team. It's unfair to punish teams for drafting well.

Yeah agree with most of this. Seems like it is designed so the cheap owners can be cheap more freely. There are some good things that could come from it, but don't think it's the best solution at all. Needs to be some exceptions.

At the end of the day though, whoever has the MVP caliber players will be in the best spot. Not so different from how it has always been in that regard.

So for us, we discuss all of these ancillary moves ad nauseam , which do matter! BUT, really we need Paolo and Franz to keep improving more than anything.

The Second Apron should have only ever be activated by trades. Getting penalized for signing your own guys is pretty damn stupid.

isn't this a hard counter to prevent super teams?

KillMonger wrote:isn't this a hard counter to prevent super teams?

Exactly, this is so the Lakers, Celtics and the Warriors cannot just keep stacking their teams at smaller markets expense. Not sure why anyone here would hate that.

NBA pushes you into Borussia Dortmund system. You have to be able to find new, young talents and replace ones who get too expensive to you even at a expense of getting worst short or both short and long term.

Only biggest markets will have ability to build and sustain mega teams. For rest of a league it will be impossible task.

NBA’s flawed salary cap and Second Apron penalties

I do not agree with the premise. The league and the players union agreed to this CBA. So, all sides accepted it.

The goal of the first and second aprons is to keep a team from signing three max players. Whether home grown, or via trade. That is not a "flaw". It is the purpose.
For example, Orlando did not max-out Suggs because of this new CBA. It is working just as planned.

Some here are proposing trades to bring in a 30M per year PG to "round-out" the team. Obviously that is impossible (i.e. no Fox).

The long term consequence of these aprons is that there will not be "that" many 50-70M per year players, but with a side consequence that most NBA players will make more than 10M a year (already more than 160 are; I project that by 2026/27 more than 220 players will make >10M per annum; i.e. more than half the league). That is, the "middle class" of the NBA will routinely expect 15-20M per annum deals from about 3-years from now.
From the 2026-27 season, the projected values for the MLE are 15.5M.
Let me state this another way: nearly every contributing vet will make more than 10M a year. Say 90%.
Only players on rookie deals and the LLE guys will be below that 10M line.
(Heck: two-way players will soon earn more than 1M a year!)

One thing I look for is if teams will have more performance and injury protections built into contracts moving forward. It makes sense to have this. But would agents agree? Right now, the disabled player exemption cannot be used because of cap restrictions. So there is a balance here for a compromise between players/agents and management: exempt DPEs from the cap but allow some level of cap protection from poor-play.
Incentives go both ways after all (every year this is a LLE guy that is a key starter; that's unfair to said player). Building in to all LLE contacts that performance will have un-capped benefits will be very popular to the players' union.

Idiosyncratic wrote:Seems like it is designed so the cheap owners can be cheap more freely.

For the 2024-25 season, the minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap.

The NBA salary cap for the 2024-25 season is set at $140.588 million.
The minimum team salary is therefore $126.529 million (90% of $140.588 million).

Teams that fail to meet this minimum must pay the shortfall to the NBA, which then distributes it among the players. This rule ensures competitive balance by encouraging teams to invest in their rosters.

drsd wrote:

NBA’s flawed salary cap and Second Apron penalties

I do not agree with the premise. The league and the players union agreed to this CBA. So, all sides accepted it.

The goal of the first and second aprons is to keep a team from signing three max players. Whether home grown, or via trade. That is not a "flaw". It is the purpose.
For example, Orlando did not max-out Suggs because of this new CBA. It is working just as planned.

Some here are proposing trades to bring in a 30M per year PG to "round-out" the team. Obviously that is impossible (i.e. no Fox).

The long term consequence of these aprons is that there will not be "that" many 50-70M per year players, but with a side consequence that most NBA players will make more than 10M a year (already more than 160 are; I project that by 2026/27 more than 220 players will make >10M per annum; i.e. more than half the league). That is, the "middle class" of the NBA will routinely expect 15-20M per annum deals from about 3-years from now.
From the 2026-27 season, the projected values for the MLE are 15.5M.
Let me state this another way: nearly every contributing vet will make more than 10M a year. Say 90%.
Only players on rookie deals and the LLE guys will be below that 10M line.
(Heck: two-way players will soon earn more than 1M a year!)

One thing I look for is if teams will have more performance and injury protections built into contracts moving forward. It makes sense to have this. But would agents agree? Right now, the disabled player exemption cannot be used because of cap restrictions. So there is a balance here for a compromise between players/agents and management: exempt DPEs from the cap but allow some level of cap protection from poor-play.
Incentives go both ways after all (every year this is a LLE guy that is a key starter; that's unfair to said player). Building in to all LLE contacts that performance will have un-capped benefits will be very popular to the players' union.

I have to disagree, Paolo and Franz both being max players puts us at a cap disadvantage. That seems to go against what the intention was in the first place. You should be rewarded for hitting on guys like that and be able to fill out your roster accordingly without the Lottery Picks counting towards aprons and extra taxes. Imagine how it would have been had we hit on another max level player when we drafted AB and Jett. This is how you lose talented players you hit on, when it’s time to pay them what they are worth you’re handcuffed and then you have to low ball your guys and hope they don’t leave for other teams because you’ve drafted well but now can’t fill out your roster and pay them. Seems to go against what they say it’s ment to do.

I have to imagine there are better ways to accomplish preventing another LeBron James “ I’m taking my talents to South Beach “ situation and maybe it’s taxing and aproning only free agent signing and not counting home grown talent into that apron. Eventually teams that do the pre draft work and/or get lucky in the draft have to watch that work walk out the door or be traded for a salary dump move.

The intention is to prevent super stacked teams with gigantic payroll regardless how they are built, it was never about only to prevent another Heathles situation.

You can do it the right way with luck and draft a super stacked team. Why should you be punished for doing what you’re supposed to do?

Bergmaniac wrote:The intention is to prevent super stacked teams with gigantic payroll regardless how they are built, it was never about only to prevent another Heathles situation.

It should be about building stacked teams like that via free agency. In what world is it right to say you drafted good players now you pay the player what they’re worth but you can’t because of a salary cap situation.. it’s counterproductive and idiotic. It should never be about spreading the talent wealth, it’s the stupidest thing ever really.

Bergmaniac wrote:The intention is to prevent super stacked teams with gigantic payroll regardless how they are built, it was never about only to prevent another Heathles situation.

Also if someone drafts a super stacked team good for them. Thats what you’re supposed to be doing, nobody should be upset or feel that’s not fair. There’s value all through the NBA Draft, players getting drafted high and are busts. Players get drafted late that are steals of the draft. You have to pay a player based off their worth and worth can be determined based off several factors but that should be a team decision that has no financial penalty.

Okc is going to be FUBAR because they hit on so many picks.

three3d wrote:I have to disagree, Paolo and Franz both being max players puts us at a cap disadvantage. That seems to go against what the intention was in the first place. You should be rewarded for hitting on guys like that and be able to fill out your roster accordingly without the Lottery Picks counting towards aprons and extra taxes. Imagine how it would have been had we hit on another max level player when we drafted AB and Jett. This is how you lose talented players you hit on, when it’s time to pay them what they are worth you’re handcuffed and then you have to low ball your guys and hope they don’t leave for other teams because you’ve drafted well but now can’t fill out your roster and pay them. Seems to go against what they say it’s ment to do.

I have to imagine there are better ways to accomplish preventing another LeBron James “ I’m taking my talents to South Beach “ situation and maybe it’s taxing and aproning only free agent signing and not counting home grown talent into that apron. Eventually teams that do the pre draft work and/or get lucky in the draft have to watch that work walk out the door or be traded for a salary dump move.

The solution here from a CBA perspective would be to have a lower max for players coming off of a rookie deal. The players' union would never go for that.

Ducklett wrote:Okc is going to be FUBAR because they hit on so many picks.

They are a prime example of this. Doing their job and doing it to damn good should be applauded, not punished.

three3d wrote:

Ducklett wrote:Okc is going to be FUBAR because they hit on so many picks.

They are a prime example of this. Doing their job and doing it to damn good should be applauded, not punished.

The good thing for them is that they have infinite future picks too. So they can keep reloading. Now teams that get good on their own farm-raised talent will need to keep trading things for future picks to keep cheap reinforcements coming in. That Suns swap we got is going to end up being a gift when we need a cheap good player.

I think with the new Media deal, NBA Salary cap is increasing 10% per season. You put that into a factor, especially with Jalen Suggs contract, in about 3 or 4 years, it might not look like a bad deal. It could probably be a bargain for us. So in this case, we can afford Franz and Paolo's max contract.

But the question is how we are still going to be able to build the core of the team. Maybe another star? That could be a discussion. Because it is probably what is needed. So we can talk about DaAaron Fox and we can talk about someone else that will pop up in the trade market.

The whole thing is simple, it is a game, very intellectual game in terms of team building. Yes, the second Apron will prevent and punish teams that will go over. But that is going to be the new normal for us. We will see...