RealGM

I'm just thinking out loud here, but I feel like these are some ideas to placate the owners without completely clobbering the players:

1. Require team options in longer contracts.

I would adjust contracts/extensions as follows:

For players signed via Bird rights, team option in year 6
For players signed without Bird rights, team option in year 5

I call this the "Joe Johnson" rule, even though it's implication for contract-year phenomenons are obvious. If you combine suggestion #1 with suggestion #2, the $123M man would've seen the following options in terms of guaranteed money:

Hawks --> 5 years, $93.9M
Others --> 4 years, $70.2M

It's obvious to most NBA fans that those deals are much more in line with the production of a good, but not great player than what the
Hawks were forced to pay just to keep him on what was already a good, but not great team. This rule would clearly favor the "home team" in re-signing a player who wants a long-term deal.

2. Further reduce the annual raise limit from 8/10.5 to 5/7.5

IMO, the salary cap isn't increasing enough from year to year to justify the current size of raises.

3. Limit the MLE to four years.

Some of the worst contracts in the NBA have been full MLE deals. Drew Gooden would have gone from $32.1M guaranteed over five years to $25.65M guaranteed over four years via suggestions #2 and #3.

4. Limit the use of the MLE, LLE, and TPE by teams who are currently over or near the luxury tax.

The exceptions should be available to teams over the cap up to the point of hitting the tax. IOW, if a team is within $3M of the tax, they should have access to the MLE, but only $3M of it.

5. Disallow teams to add players to their playoff roster if they were waived or traded by that same team at any point in the season.

The "Ilgauskas" rule. Enough said.

Hard cap 50m
Roll salaries back 25%
Let their be a franchise tag for teams, like football. But has to stay under the cap. Protecting teams like what happened to the Cavs.
Contracts are only 50% guaranteed. Long term contracts are killers for teams.
4 year contracts are the max for FA's.
Rookie contracts are the same.
Players have to be at least 20 years old to play in NBA.

Reduce the age limit to eighteen. I don't care about the vitality of NCAA basketball and people should not be prevented from making their money, so long as it's well earned.

I'm not sure about this franchise tag, but I'm not cool with the better players leaving their teams and getting the same deal with a new club by way of the sign-and-trade, which also enables GMs to circumvent a minor element of the system supposedly instituted to reward a player's loyalty. I'd also like the maximum length of contracts reduced to four and five years, so that the aforementioned loyalty incentive forms a larger percentage of the contract. Not to mention the whole "GMs need saving from themselves" angle. But, I digress, if a player wants out, he should have to forgo the extra security; no ifs, ands or buts. By all means, allow the sign-and-trade - GMs need to keep the facility to acquire assets in return - but the terms should exist as if the player is signing as an unrestricted FA with the new club.

1. Mostly the same.
2. Remove things that are clearly unfair.
3. Help the owners some. Help the players some. (#2 will do more for the owners.)


A. draft: same
B. cap and lux tax: pretty much the same
C. no Bird-rights except going over the cap to retain a player who has been there 2+ years.
D. Rookie deals increase a little (10%), but 1st rounders - 5 years, 2nd rounders -3 years.
E. team options each year on rookie deals
F. 4 years is the longest a non-rookie contract can be.
G. no player options (ugh) or team options (minus the rookie deals)
H. no more MLE and bi-annual
I. 'H' replaced with $12 million flexibility to each team. $12 mill over TWO years. Flexibility.
J. vet mins and regular minimums could remain and not count towards the $12 mill
K. the $12 mill could be applied to trades too (the 125% rule could remain with it. or 130%)
L. no "franchise player" thing introduced. those are wrong in several ways.
M. max contracts shrink a tad. 3% or something. (cap could still be same...)

These ideas give more options to vet players and save the owners money when taken together.
Better said: they keep the owners from getting pillaged and keep the players from being trapped unless they cause drama.