RealGM

In 2016, the NBA saw the salary cap spike from $70 million to $94.1 million as new TV rights deals kicked in. That caused a scenario where the 2016 free agent class received contracts that were out of balance with the rest of the league.

With the NBA set to sign new media rights deals in 2025, another cap spike was looming. In order to avoid another spike, the NBA and NBPA have agreed to cap smoothing in the new CBA.

The smoothing agreement will see cap increases limited to 10%, while pushing any additional percentage increase into subsequent years. By smoothing out the increases, that should provide more balance to free agent classes over multiple years.

Via Shams Charania/The Athletic

Players learned their lesson from last time?

Sofia wrote:Players learned their lesson from last time?

Seems more owner friendly than anything to me given that new teams have cap space annually and some teams are less wasteful than others in general

PDXKnight wrote:

Sofia wrote:Players learned their lesson from last time?

Seems more owner friendly than anything to me given that new teams have cap space annually and some teams are less wasteful than others in general

What I don't understand is what happens if the next TV deal is even bigger than anticipated and the cap is supposed to jump like 30%, and then another like 15% the next year... Is all of that extra money held in escrow for the players or redistributed among them equitably? Because if it's the former, that's 25% of higher spending that is not being spent.

All of this because Kevin Durant is a coward.

I was saying they had to raise the cap gently over a few years last time. They really have people that don't think of these things and get paid. Have to protect the teams that aren't big free agent desitinations. Not allow tax teams a year where they can go out and sign players much over the MLE.

It amazes me that this has gone so under the radar when its so important.

Cassius wrote:

PDXKnight wrote:

Sofia wrote:Players learned their lesson from last time?

Seems more owner friendly than anything to me given that new teams have cap space annually and some teams are less wasteful than others in general

What I don't understand is what happens if the next TV deal is even bigger than anticipated and the cap is supposed to jump like 30%, and then another like 15% the next year... Is all of that extra money held in escrow for the players or redistributed among them equitably? Because if it's the former, that's 25% of higher spending that is not being spent.

All of this because Kevin Durant is a coward.

If it wasn't Durant it just would have been someone(s) else. Warriors played the cap game well and became a destination and it unbalanced the entire league.

Cassius wrote:

PDXKnight wrote:

Sofia wrote:Players learned their lesson from last time?

Seems more owner friendly than anything to me given that new teams have cap space annually and some teams are less wasteful than others in general

What I don't understand is what happens if the next TV deal is even bigger than anticipated and the cap is supposed to jump like 30%, and then another like 15% the next year... Is all of that extra money held in escrow for the players or redistributed among them equitably? Because if it's the former, that's 25% of higher spending that is not being spent.

It will be held in escrow (likely earning interest) to subsidize additional 10% cap increases, even when the pie doesn’t grow 10%. Personally I’m a little surprised it wasn’t 15%, but the Players Union realized that cap smoothing meant that everyone profits, not just the Mozgov’s and Deng’s who happen to be free agents in the year the income spike hits.

Btw, I think that your suspicions were shared by the players last time we were in this boat, and they refused cap smoothing because they didn’t trust the owners to hold that money in escrow. These days, I think there is a much better relationship between players and owners.

Johnny Bball wrote:
If it wasn't Durant it just would have been someone(s) else. Warriors played the cap game well and became a destination and it unbalanced the entire league.

I mean, someone else isn't a top 20 player of all time. Look at this mess:

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/6/30/12052290/nba-free-agent-signings-tracker-2016-rumors

The only other 2016 deals where guys changed teams, that in my opinion provided positive value.. were Horford to Boston, Eric Gordon to Houston, Dwight to Atlanta (for a year?), DJ Augustin to Orlando, and ironically, Harrison Barnes to Dallas. It's not like the whole league swapped jerseys, so not only did GSW get KD, but the rest of league largely got worse. I thought he should have gone to Houston to play next to Harden again and am pretty confident that if he had, he'd be 3rd in line for the GOAT conversation, today.

Cassius wrote:

Johnny Bball wrote:
If it wasn't Durant it just would have been someone(s) else. Warriors played the cap game well and became a destination and it unbalanced the entire league.

I mean, someone else isn't a top 20 player of all time. Look at this mess:

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/6/30/12052290/nba-free-agent-signings-tracker-2016-rumors

The only other 2016 deals where guys changed teams, that in my opinion provided positive value.. were Horford to Boston, Eric Gordon to Houston, Dwight to Atlanta (for a year?), DJ Augustin to Orlando, and ironically, Harrison Barnes to Dallas. It's not like the whole league swapped jerseys, so not only did GSW get KD, but the rest of league largely got worse. I thought he should have gone to Houston to play next to Harden again and am pretty confident that if he had, he'd be 3rd in line for the GOAT conversation, today.

Just saying, its a place lots of players would have signed IF Durant didn't. If Durant doesn't take it, those guys that didn't move, just might.

Quite honestly, if they picked up two solid players instead of Durant, the may have won even more (Durant being unlucky with his health then leaving unexpectedly).

Johnny Bball wrote:
Just saying, its a place lots of players would have signed IF Durant didn't. If Durant doesn't take it, those guys that didn't move, just might.

Quite honestly, if they picked up two solid players instead of Durant, the may have won even more (Durant being unlucky with his health then leaving unexpectedly).

You're joking. They're not beating Houston or the Cavs without KD, especially if Barnes left. Who else were they going to sign that summer? Evan Fournier and Kent Bazemore?

Cassius wrote:

Johnny Bball wrote:
Just saying, its a place lots of players would have signed IF Durant didn't. If Durant doesn't take it, those guys that didn't move, just might.

Quite honestly, if they picked up two solid players instead of Durant, the may have won even more (Durant being unlucky with his health then leaving unexpectedly).

You're joking. They're not beating Houston or the Cavs without KD, especially if Barnes left. Who else were they going to sign that summer? Evan Fournier and Kent Bazemore?

One of these things is not like the other!