10/11 Free Agent writing on the wall

cdt3 · Post #1 » by **cdt3** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 5:12 am

With the players union contracts expiring summer 2011 and attendance down 15 % leaguewide next summer will be big changes with contracts. NBA owners are losing money big time including the Maloofs. Small market teams like the Kings or Utah cannot commit to a guy like Boozer who is expiring this year. He will likely want a 5 year contract with $15mil + range. Most NBA owners will not take a big chance with the money with so many empty seats. Boozer may be able to get that kind of money from LA or Miami or NY but no small market will pay him.

I really do not see the Kings making any moves to bring in any long salaries. It looks more and more like the Kings will wait for the draft to get a big man. With a team with so many good young players the Kings will keep this group together. I still think they can get to near .500 as is when KMart returns for the second half. Which is definitely heading in the right direction of a Spurs like small market model.

rpa · Post #2 » by **rpa** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:45 am

It's really a complete unknown as far as what to expect from the new CBA. You can imagine the players will be pushing for more money and the owners will be pushing for more salary restrictions, shorter contracts, and maybe a higher age limit (though I have a feeling that may fail miserably with the showing of guys like Evans/Jennings). If I had to guess here's what I think will be pushed for:

1) I think the owners are going to try and push for less guaranteed years. It honestly wouldn't surprise me to see them try to push it down by 1 or even 2 years (current max is 6 years for the current team, 5 years for everyone else).

2) I could see the owners trying to push a hard cap into place but, to me, this will be more for negotiating than anything.

3) We'll probably see another "Allen Houston"-type exception

4) I expect them to either do away with the MLE completely or to change it in a major way. It seems a number of bad contracts happen because teams give mediocre players the full MLE (Beno, Diop, Gortat in a couple years, etc.)

In the end though I highly doubt much gets changed that will severely impact the Kings. That is, I don't see them dropping the cap a great deal (if any).

roy10 · Post #3 » by **roy10** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 5:49 pm

they should limit the MLE to three years and reduce max contracts by one year (so it will be 5 for current team and 4 for any other team).

boogydown · Post #4 » by **boogydown** » Sun Dec 20, 2009 9:46 am

They only need to do one major change which will benefit the NBA majorly

- Non guaranteed contracts after a certain period of time

Anywhere between 12 to 36 months seems reasonable after the contract is signed. The pros of doing this

- More transactions in the NBA which I think will bring a new boost to NBA traffic as teams could change constantly making it more appealing for the teams that are bad.
- Prevents team in crisis from borrowing money because they can waive all their older contracts.
- The constant complaints of players overpaid will be a thing of the past
- Injuries or signings that cripple a team will be a thing of the past
- Stops players from being lazy

Instead the players who are good will get what they deserve while the Eddy Curry's will not. Follow the NFL rule as you can clearly see that is the way to go.

Smills91 · Post #5 » by **Smills91** » Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:22 pm

cdt3 wrote:With the players union contracts expiring summer 2011 and attendance down 15 % leaguewide next summer will be big changes with contracts. NBA owners are losing money big time including the Maloofs. Small market teams like the Kings or Utah cannot commit to a guy like Boozer who is expiring this year. He will likely want a 5 year contract with $15mil + range. Most NBA owners will not take a big chance with the money with so many empty seats. Boozer may be able to get that kind of money from LA or Miami or NY but no small market will pay him.

I really do not see the Kings making any moves to bring in any long salaries. It looks more and more like the Kings will wait for the draft to get a big man. With a team with so many good young players the Kings will keep this group together. I still think they can get to near .500 as is when KMart returns for the second half. Which is definitely heading in the right direction of a Spurs like small market model.

It was reported that the Kings are now operating at a break-even level. So to say they're losing money(from the Kings) is just inaccurate.

Smills91 · Post #6 » by **Smills91** » Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:23 pm

boogydown wrote:They only need to do one major change which will benefit the NBA majorly

- Non guaranteed contracts after a certain period of time

Anywhere between 12 to 36 months seems reasonable after the contract is signed. The pros of doing this

- More transactions in the NBA which I think will bring a new boost to NBA traffic as teams could change constantly making it more appealing for the teams that are bad.
- Prevents team in crisis from borrowing money because they can waive all their older contracts.
- The constant complaints of players overpaid will be a thing of the past
- Injuries or signings that cripple a team will be a thing of the past
- Stops players from being lazy

Instead the players who are good will get what they deserve while the Eddy Curry's will not. Follow the NFL rule as you can clearly see that is the way to go.

+1 on the non-guaranteed contracts. There's no guarantees in life.

OGSactownballer · Post #7 » by **OGSactownballer** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 12:42 am

I was a HUGE supporter of rookie limits as the money they were getting had gotten ridicuous. I support both non-guaranteed contracts AND a true hard cap just as much to get the crazy amounts that players are getting under control.

wiltchamberlain · Post #8 » by **wiltchamberlain** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:31 am

Here's a source as an addendum to what Smills said earlier.
http://www.sacbee.com/kings/story/2378296.html

"Nonetheless, Joe Maloof said the Kings are operating "probably around break-even right now" through their cost-cutting."

villatrynity154 · Post #9 » by **villatrynity154** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:16 pm

boogydown wrote:They only need to do one major change which will benefit the NBA majorly

- Non guaranteed contracts after a certain period of time

Anywhere between 12 to 36 months seems reasonable after the contract is signed. The pros of doing this

- More transactions in the NBA which I think will bring a new boost to NBA traffic as teams could change constantly making it more appealing for the teams that are bad.
- Prevents team in crisis from borrowing money because they can waive all their older contracts.
- The constant complaints of players overpaid will be a thing of the past
- Injuries or signings that cripple a team will be a thing of the past
- Stops players from being lazy

Instead the players who are good will get what they deserve while the Eddy Curry's will not. Follow the NFL rule as you can clearly see that is the way to go.

there is a rule in european soccer that lets you borrow players and their contracts....you sign with a specific team but that only matters in terms of contract length cause they can call you back after each season played somewhere else....i don't know all the specifics well but i know this is done and it sort of goes along the sames lines of what you were saying about more transactions in the NBA...