NBA shouldbe incentivized

[soobias]

i wished the NBA was more incentivized and players recieved what they're worth for good or bad and it should be off of several different things...
games played
win/loss
consistency

those to me would make the games played a lot more interesting.
what do you guys think and would you add anymore incentives ?

[Norm2953]

Players union would never agree to it

[Village Idiot]

Players union would never agree to it

The players union seems to be concerned about two things primarily.

1. the size of the pie
2. the players share of the pie

Assuming 2 doesn't change it would only be a different distribution of the same slice of the pie. If having a more incentive based system would increase 1 I don't know why they would necessarily be opposed.

[Norm2953]

A number of the players who have gotten paid might not mind W/l but so many of them are
into load management and would view games played as a non starter. Basketball players play
up to 100 games each year and think they should be allowed to call in "sick" ever so often.

[DeBlazerRiddem]

For one, many teams already do use minor incentives. It's not something that cannot be done on an individual by individual basis. But there are reasons why it is used more as a cherry on top for a player contract than the meat and potatoes of a players contract.

However, if the league were to try and codify that they apply to players across the board than they would have to negotiate that fact with the players union, who would want something in return for having limits placed on them and losing their guaranteed contacts - which is one of the major benefits of being an NBA player versus other sports. So players are not going to want to lose the ability to get guaranteed contracts without a major piece being added on their side, and what that boils down to is a bigger share of BRI. Would the owners agree to get less money overall so they could build incentives like this into player contracts? Very doubtful. At the end of the day the players have agreed to a certain BRI% because they get guaranteed contracts, were they to give up guaranteed contracts they would have to be compensated with more money, and if you think players now are overpaid then that probably doesn't solve your issue with the league.

It also becomes complicated when dealing with the salary cap. Having player salaries that are not well defined, that might vary by significant percentage points based on how the season plays out, makes it that much harder to keep our payroll under control. What if everyone is healthier than predicted and you blow your budget, or what if you have a ton of injuries and come up well short of what you should have spent. Having dynamic variables like that makes things much harder on the GM.

Finally, and maybe most importantly, this would create HUGE lockerroom conflicts with the coach. Every DNP-CD would be money taken out of the players wallets. They would be incentivized to play through injury and dog it on the court. Players ahead of you in the rotation would be taking your potential money night after night. Instead of players competing against players from other teams it would turn into players competing against players on their own team. A coach who fumbled a win, a coach who was directed to develop young players, a coach who is set up to fail by management so the team can tank would all create systems of internal pressure that could be devastating for a lockerroom. You dont want players turning against you because of coaching and management decisions. You think there is a problem with small market and bad teams getting free agency and veteran talent now, but if wins/losses were taken into account no player would ever voluntarily join a bad team again unless they are paid stupid stupid money to do so.

It is used as a cherry on top and that is the best way to keep incentives.

[monopoman]

Already we have a situation where the NBA is incentivized you saw teams wary of Kyrie because of the drama that comes with him on a roster. Typically the highest 20 paid players in the NBA are great players, or they were when they signed that contract. So again I see a situation where the best players 98% of the time make the most money, assuming they are not on rookie deals.

If a player misses a good number of games it will impact how many teams are willing to sign him and to how much money over as many years. Also if teams go around throwing money at horrible contracts that is on them, it's basically like blaming a plumber making way over what a plumber makes normally instead of the employer paying him way more than he might be worth.

Teams and the ownership behind them have the most power in contract negotiations unless they go in thinking they have to sign the player no matter what which is rare.