This new CBA is awful

[mkot]

Many have suggested to have a cap modifier for players who were drafted by the team. Team should be encouraged to keep the players they drafted, invested and developed. Teams who built their championship team organically like OKC (JDub, Chet, Wallace), Celtics (Tatum, Brown), Warriors (Curry, Thompson, Green, Kuminga) Nuggets (Jokic, Murray, MPJ, Braun) should also be rewarded by drafting well. And players staying with their same team is how rivalry is created. Win-win for all parties.

Read on Twitter

[Ruma85]

Many have suggested to have a cap modifier for players who were drafted by the team. Team should be encouraged to keep the players they drafted, invested and developed. Teams who built their championship team organically like OKC (JDub, Chet, Wallace), Celtics (Tatum, Brown), Warriors (Curry, Thompson, Green, Kuminga) Nuggets (Jokic, Murray, MPJ, Braun) should also be rewarded by drafting well. And players staying with their same team is how rivalry is created. Win-win for all parties.

Read on Twitter

1000%

[benson13]

I don't necessarily hate it, but I really wish they would have cap modifiers for teams who drafted, developed and found success with homegrown talent. Even if it's .75 cents on the dollar. The CBA is working against itself by penalizing franchises for rewarding those guys.

An org like OKC is going to feel the pain big time when Chet and JWill come up for extensions and it's not right.

I feel for OKC more than other teams with home grown talent. The Thunder didn't acquire all their picks through tanking. They only had two really bad seasons. Jalen Williams was selected with a pick they traded Paul George for, and they were in the playoffs that year.

I don't know how you could implement a policy differentiating the two.

[In-N-Out 247]

I don't necessarily hate it, but I really wish they would have cap modifiers for teams who drafted, developed and found success with homegrown talent. Even if it's .75 cents on the dollar. The CBA is working against itself by penalizing franchises for rewarding those guys.

An org like OKC is going to feel the pain big time when Chet and JWill come up for extensions and it's not right.

I feel for OKC more than other teams with home grown talent. The Thunder didn't acquire all their picks through tanking. They only had two really bad seasons. Jalen Williams was selected with a pick they traded Paul George for, and they were in the playoffs that year.

I don't know how you could implement a policy differentiating the two.

I don't think the league should be rewarding teams for overpaying guys either. I think a good solution to this is to make the max cap hit on a rookie extension 25%. That way if a player qualifies for the higher max - like Evan Mobley or Cade Cunningham, they would still get their higher salary (in this case $46.3M) but only count 25% ($38.6).

[Snakebites]

I like it.

It limits the advantage of having an owner who doesn't care about luxury tax expenses.

[mkot]

I feel for OKC more than other teams with home grown talent. The Thunder didn't acquire all their picks through tanking. They only had two really bad seasons. Jalen Williams was selected with a pick they traded Paul George for, and they were in the playoffs that year.

They famously tanked for the 2022 draft tho. But tanking while you are bad is definitely part of the process in rebuilding so nothing wrong with that. I actually feel more for the Nuggets. Jokic was drafted in the 2nd round, Murray was drafted with a pick they traded Carmelo for, and MPJ was picked 14th and they barely missed the playoff by 1 game that year.

The 2019 Raptors worth mentioning too, Kawhi and Lowry were both acquired by trading, but OG, Siakam, Powell, Vanvleet and Valanciunas (traded mid-season) are home grown.

[Snakebites]

I feel for OKC more than other teams with home grown talent. The Thunder didn't acquire all their picks through tanking. They only had two really bad seasons. Jalen Williams was selected with a pick they traded Paul George for, and they were in the playoffs that year.

They famously tanked for the 2022 draft tho. But tanking while you are bad is definitely part of the process in rebuilding so nothing wrong with that. I actually feel more for the Nuggets. Jokic was drafted in the 2nd round, Murray was drafted with a pick they traded Carmelo for, and MPJ was picked 14th and they barely missed the playoff by 1 game that year.

The 2019 Raptors worth mentioning too, Kawhi and Lowry were both acquired by trading, but OG, Siakam, Powell, Vanvleet and Valanciunas (traded mid-season) are home grown.

The Raptors also didn't have a single lottery pick on their roster. So no tanking either, at least not to build the team they ended up winning with.

[benson13]

I don't necessarily hate it, but I really wish they would have cap modifiers for teams who drafted, developed and found success with homegrown talent. Even if it's .75 cents on the dollar. The CBA is working against itself by penalizing franchises for rewarding those guys.

An org like OKC is going to feel the pain big time when Chet and JWill come up for extensions and it's not right.

I feel for OKC more than other teams with home grown talent. The Thunder didn't acquire all their picks through tanking. They only had two really bad seasons. Jalen Williams was selected with a pick they traded Paul George for, and they were in the playoffs that year.

I don't know how you could implement a policy differentiating the two.

I don't think the league should be rewarding teams for overpaying guys either. I think a good solution to this is to make the max cap hit on a rookie extension 25%. That way if a player qualifies for the higher max - like Evan Mobley or Cade Cunningham, they would still get their higher salary (in this case $46.3M) but only count 25% ($38.6).

I agree with your motivation, but I disagree with your solution. Do you honestly think the Pistons have a shot at a title with Cade Cunningham using up 30% of the salary cap? I think that's overpaying him. That's why I would limit the difference in penalties to the luxury tax. Screw up your salary cap, and that's on you.


I remember wondering what the Bucks were thinking when they signed Michael Redd to a max deal. It bothers me that it was 20 years ago, but I digress. They had one .500 season with him as their best player. The success they'd had with him on the roster was more the result of Sam Cassel, Ray Allen, Tim Thomas, etc. He was just their best player at the time, and teams simply gave their best players max contracts. It's dumb because if your best player isn't good enough then you don't have the flexibility to surround them with more talent.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

The only thing that might make sense could be not having the supermax escalators counting against the tax.
But it would make every trade very tricky, because at that point you're locked to those guys unless you're willing go suddenly deep into the tax.

[madmaxmedia]

I dont blame the CBA, i know i'm in the minority but i blame the players. You have to either Hard Cap it or no cap at all....this middle of the road crap is what kills it all. With a Hard Cap you can limit everything and easily make teams and keep all teams on "even" playing field, or with no cap whatsoever you open the door for "super-duper" teams like the Dodgers in baseball where Lakers, Knicks, etc will spend billions on salary while Indiana, OKC and small markets will have to build within and try to compete. One way or the other its going to end up in one of those two spots and it'll come down to the players/owners wanting to kill small markets or pursue parity.

I think the teams wanted the original soft cap too though, they wanted the ability to be able to re-sign and keep together great teams, because those teams generated more revenue as well. I think in general it's fine, but as you point out maybe gave them too much freedom. There's a middle path to be found that tries to accommodate for both (mostly) positive ends.

[madmaxmedia]

I like it.

It limits the advantage of having an owner who doesn't care about luxury tax expenses.

It also rewards the truly great FO's, they're the ones figuring out how to act within creative constraints (that everyone agreed to or at least went along with.)

[Dominator83]

Breaking up good teams that good ownership has built is bad business.

If good ownership is good they will always win over the long term

Parity is good for the league. Look at the nfl

Parity means rewarding poorly managed teams.

Im a Bulls fan. We have been a poorly managed team for the better part of 27 years. Im yet to see any of these rewards! just sayin

[Dominator83]

They should loosen it up and add some minor clause/rules for well drafting teams.

I don't know, maybe make your superstars cap hit lower if he stays with you once he signs the max contract (but the player gets the normal amount)? 25% hit instead of 30% and later on 30% instead of 35%.

Maybe add something like a Designated Player rule for 1 of your drafted picks, where the cap hit is limited to a certain amount, but the player can be paid more.

And those things should only count, as long as they are with your team. If you trade those guys, their cap hit increases back to 30/35%

That would reward loyalty and good drafting.

The supermax never should have been implemented in the 1st place. It was a massive overreaction by the owners because KD jumped teams in free agency. An unintended consequence is now the off-seasons are alot more boring! The NBA sells itself more on juicy storylines and speculation, than it does on actual basketball games. The way its setup now, top notch stars never reach free agency anymore. Look at the excitement and constant coverage in 2010, when we had Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Amar'e all unrestricted free agents taking meetings with multiple teams. You also had a good 2nd tier of Joe Johnson, Boozer and David Lee.

Im pretty sure the last time we had anything like that was 2019 with KD, Kyrie, Butler and Kawhi. But since then its been extremely lackluster and that looks to continue next summer as well with Luka now being locked up.

[RRyder823]

They should loosen it up and add some minor clause/rules for well drafting teams.

I don't know, maybe make your superstars cap hit lower if he stays with you once he signs the max contract (but the player gets the normal amount)? 25% hit instead of 30% and later on 30% instead of 35%.

Maybe add something like a Designated Player rule for 1 of your drafted picks, where the cap hit is limited to a certain amount, but the player can be paid more.

And those things should only count, as long as they are with your team. If you trade those guys, their cap hit increases back to 30/35%

That would reward loyalty and good drafting.

The supermax never should have been implemented in the 1st place. It was a massive overreaction by the owners because KD jumped teams in free agency. An unintended consequence is now the off-seasons are alot more boring! The NBA sells itself more on juicy storylines and speculation, than it does on actual basketball games. The way its setup now, top notch stars never reach free agency anymore. Look at the excitement and constant coverage in 2010, when we had Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Amar'e all unrestricted free agents taking meetings with multiple teams. You also had a good 2nd tier of Joe Johnson, Boozer and David Lee.

Im pretty sure the last time we had anything like that was 2019 with KD, Kyrie, Butler and Kawhi. But since then its been extremely lackluster and that looks to continue next summer as well with Luka now being locked up.

That's not a good thing



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[Johnny Bball]

The new CBA is working as intended and its great for most markets.

[Chinook]

A lot of folks saying drafting and keeping guys is "building the right way", and I don't think they've examined that belief enough. There's no right or wrong way. There are ways that are more effective and/or sustainable than others. The new CBA makes holding the same core together harder no matter how you got them. That's good. Actual good drafting is rewarded by having good players on cheap contracts, not on having priority access to free agents earning market value. Teams that are good at drafting don't overpay role-players because they can replace them cheaply. That gives them money to pay stars, no matter how they acquire them.

If there were no DPE, Boston could've built around Brown and Tatum easily. They messed up overpaying White, Holiday and Prozingas, and the extra money from the two DPEs ruined them. But they aren't a sympathy case here. No idea why folks think they are.

[NoStatsGuy]

its honestly the point of the salary cap system. The league wants teams to pay at least close to the same amount of salaries. according to espn the celtics paid around 500 mil salaries and taax and the pacers paid like 170. this is a "problem" in soccer, as we always see the same teams competing for the trophies because these teams have oil money to pay the best of the best. now, opinions can defer, is it a problem or just the nature of the free market. The point is tho, the salary cap is there to avoid this situation like the one in soccer.