"Only way to avoid 'super teams' is to impose a hard cap."

[clevceltics]

After reading all 14 pages, Im not sure why I did, I have seen nothing that would make me vote for a hard cap or some tricked out system that would water down teams even more than they are now. So since 2 all star level players play together, they have a super team? Give me a break.

Even in your hard cap, franchise tag, designated tag world you still cant recreate a system that solve the simple problem that there are only about 6 or 7 superstars in the entire league. When your best/max player is Brook Lopez and mine is DHoward my team is going to win more times than not. Ok so you say well take away the max contract, well if you do that why wouldnt players flock to the very largest markets since they can have better endorsement deals in NY than Memphis.

I wish they would have put a stipulation in the new CBA that if your team finishes in the bottom 10 4 out of 5 years then the basketball people lose their job and the owner gets fined 20% of the value of the cap.

I would must rather have the old CBA back because the new CBA kills hope of seeing more than a handful of good teams with above average players. I never want to see the 2007 Cavaliers again.

Bottom line teams will always have some advantages over others no matter what system you put in place. To say small markets dont have a chance is laughable because LeBron, Melo, CP3, and Howard all came from small markets. They all had those players from 6 - 8 years. Each failed to make the right moves as soon as they recieved those players. Cavs took Luke Jackson over JR Smith, Josh Smith, Tony Allen, Al Jefferson, and Kevin Martin to name a few players. Hindsight is 20 - 20 but do you not think a Josh Smith, Boozer and LeBron would be able to produce a title team?

Please stop making up this idea that small markets cant compete. KG played in Minn for 12 years. How much longer is he supposed to stay? Why cant you see that bad management is what is killing teams?

[Agenda42]

Ok so you say well take away the max contract, well if you do that why wouldnt players flock to the very largest markets since they can have better endorsement deals in NY than Memphis.

If you eliminate the max contract, then no team would be able to pay 3 superstars the market rate. Instead of LeBron taking a $2M a year hit to play with Bosh and Wade, he'd be taking a $20M hit, because teams would be lining up to offer him $35M a year. This would naturally spread the talent around the league without interfering with a player's right to choose where he plays. The biggest market teams will still likely get the lion's share of the superstars, but they would no longer be able to do what the Lakers have done and build their own all-star team.

Also, if players were being paid their fair market value, it wouldn't be as big of a loss when a superstar left your team. When Cleveland lost LeBron, they only got back $15M in cap space, and obviously you can't replace what he brings for that price. Imagine if LeBron made $40M, and you could fill the cap space he left behind with 3 fringe all-stars.

[joseph mamah]

I dont see a problem with super teams. the nba is at its best when it has 2 or 3 great teams and a handful of others with a shot. Its a fact of life that young millionaires if given the option tend to want to live in LA, New York or Miami.It may not be fair but welcome to life. the problem with the NBA is horible team management.half the gms in the league shouldnt have jobs but its somewhat of an old boys network and half the owners are just looking to make a profit. OKC was able to build a team. now everybodys trying to chase the "OKC model" when all they really did was make wise decisions and have a little bit of luck. every team has a shot the big boys just have a wider margin for error and hard cap or not i dont see that changing.

[joseph mamah]

Agenda, why do you consider Miami to be this big bad market like LA/ NY/ CHI, it's not. No one cared about this franchise a few years back. Now it's just a "right now" glamor market, even Lamar Odom didn't resign there after being traded away. I really don't remember any big free agent going there before James and Bosh.

Shaq to Miami was not a free agent transaction, but it turns out that very few superstars actually move in free agency. It was a good example of the Heat gaining a competitive advantage as a result of being located in Miami. I don't view Miami as a big market, I view it as a glamour market that is likely to have a sustainable competitive advantage in the new structure of the league.

Miami wasn't interesting in previous eras because players didn't move the way they do now. Players have never had more control over what city they play in than they do today.

You're wrong. Tons of athletes have homes in Miami where they vaca in the offseason. If Miami was some hot spot to play, then we would have leverage in other sports too. We don't. It's Pat Riley and Micky Arison just doing a great job. Yeah, it's nice living here, but most athletes don't seem to give 2 **** about that when considering where to play. Otherwise, all our sports teams would be boss like the Heat. PEACE.

Pat Riley IS the man, modern day Jerry West. Miamis other teams arent good because the Dolphins have bad management nobody wants to play baseball in the hot *** Miami summer and hockey players tend to be cold weather people.

[clevceltics]

Ok so you say well take away the max contract, well if you do that why wouldnt players flock to the very largest markets since they can have better endorsement deals in NY than Memphis.

If you eliminate the max contract, then no team would be able to pay 3 superstars the market rate. Instead of LeBron taking a $2M a year hit to play with Bosh and Wade, he'd be taking a $20M hit, because teams would be lining up to offer him $35M a year. This would naturally spread the talent around the league without interfering with a player's right to choose where he plays. The biggest market teams will still likely get the lion's share of the superstars, but they would no longer be able to do what the Lakers have done and build their own all-star team.

Also, if players were being paid their fair market value, it wouldn't be as big of a loss when a superstar left your team. When Cleveland lost LeBron, they only got back $15M in cap space, and obviously you can't replace what he brings for that price. Imagine if LeBron made $40M, and you could fill the cap space he left behind with 3 fringe all-stars.

I could buy that to some degree if you eliminated the tax or go back to the old tax and get rid of cap holds. You get rid of those things I would agree with getting rid of max contracts. I honestly dont have a problem with what the Lakers did. I never want to see every team look like that 2009 series between Cleveland and Orlando. LeBron and the Bums vs Howard and the Bums. If I wanted to watch that I would watch college basketball.

Lastly, what team is going to have 3fringe all stars to trade for a guy like LeBron? And if you are the team that has LeBron why would you trade him for 3 fringe all stars?

[clevceltics]

Also we are talking about superstars leading teams. Imagine if your teams best player is Brandon Jennings?

[Bulls Heero 81]

Agenda, I agree with you on the max contract, but unfortunately neither the players nor the owners want that. The owners don't want to tie the entire cap to one player, and the players don't want to squeeze out the middle class. You would have to come up with another way that both sides could agree to realistically.

I think the NBA screwed itself long term by allowing certain teams to move. They should never allowed the Grizzlies to move to Memphis from Vancouver. The Hornets should have stayed in Charlotte. The Kings should be moved to Anaheim. Seattle should have kept its team. The last franchise should have been awarded to St. Louis/ San Jose. Just those simple steps along would have reduced the small market teams and increased several mid market teams and a small market with a better chance to succeed. Also, this would increase the amount of better living places for potential free agents.

When it comes to glamor markets in basketball, I think it has to do more with the hip hop culture and it's influence on the NBA fans, players, etc. I think Brooklyn will become a new one by default, and San Fransisco should be another once that team moves.

[microfib4thewin]

I see this argument a lot, but I think a great case study is Utah Jazz vs LA Lakers for the last dozen years. One team has a handful of rings, the other hasn't even made the Finals. Is this because LA has 5-rings worth of better front office management? The best player for LA in that time span that they drafted was Andrew Bynum, who is comparable to Deron Williams drafted by the Jazz. Every other move LA has made to out-compete Utah has been accomplished by players pushing to go there because of market and being able to pay at times when Utah couldn't.

Nobody is claiming the system should reward bad management, just that players should have to choose between a stacked team and money so that the playing field is a bit more level.

Yes, every Laker transaction stems from the players asking for LA. Exaggeration doesn't make a statement more truthful. You have Shaq/Kobe, then Malone/Payton going there as a cheap 1 year rental(which btw a hard cap would not prevent from happening), and you have Nash this year. Aside from Shaq/Kobe, the other guys wanted to go to LA only because it's a contending team. If the Lakers mismanaged just like the Celtics or the Sixers did after the 80s they wouldn't be attracting anyone. Large markets don't make attractive destination unless they can keep themselves relevant. Every large market team outside of the Lakers is proof of this.

If you are going to claim that the Lakers only stayed afloat because every player wants LA and it has nothing to do with management, then I can also say that Jazz's management has nothing to do with Malone/Stockton/Sloan being loyal to the organization for two decades.

[clevceltics]

Much of it has to do with a management structure that is commited to winning and has the backing to take chances. They also have to be smart in the process. No one was talking about going to Boston before the Ray Allen trade. That trade allowed them to get KG and subsequent players. Ainge took a huge chance in bringing in Ray Allen but its a move that has set them up as a place that players will ultimately want to play. (Yes I do know that KG has much more of an impact on players wanting to play there than Ray but without Ray there is no KG). The point of this example is that if you have a smart gm then you can create a place where players will want to play.

My next bet as a team from a big market that will be pretty good. GSW. They have Jerry West. They have a young coach who will need time but will probably be pretty good. They have a ton of parts with Curry, Barnes, Thompson, Bogut, and Lee. I can see a major star being traded there due to the parts that they have.

[clevceltics]

Much of it has to do with a management structure that is commited to winning and has the backing to take chances. They also have to be smart in the process. No one was talking about going to Boston before the Ray Allen trade. That trade allowed them to get KG and subsequent players. Ainge took a huge chance in bringing in Ray Allen but its a move that has set them up as a place that players will ultimately want to play. (Yes I do know that KG has much more of an impact on players wanting to play there than Ray but without Ray there is no KG). The point of this example is that if you have a smart gm then you can create a place where players will want to play.

My next bet as a team from a big market that will be pretty good. GSW. They have Jerry West. They have a young coach who will need time but will probably be pretty good. They have a ton of parts with Curry, Barnes, Thompson, Bogut, and Lee. I can see a major star being traded there due to the parts that they have.

[r3demption]

Why is the hard cap the only answer wont a franchise tag work just as well?

[Agenda42]

I never want to see every team look like that 2009 series between Cleveland and Orlando. LeBron and the Bums vs Howard and the Bums. If I wanted to watch that I would watch college basketball.

That's fair. I think you'd still see some of this, some franchises just have no idea how to evaluate talent. That said, one of the consequences of a league in which stars make more is that role players make less, which means that you could nearly always be able to surround a star with useful players.

You wouldn't have the admittedly amazing Finals series like this last one, because the stars would be more spread out, but in exchange you wouldn't have such a pointless first round of the playoffs or so many dreadfully unwatchable regular season games. That's a trade I'd be willing to make.

Lastly, what team is going to have 3fringe all stars to trade for a guy like LeBron? And if you are the team that has LeBron why would you trade him for 3 fringe all stars?

I'm not suggesting a trade. I'm saying that in a worth where LeBron is paid what he's worth, after LeBron leaves your team you can sign 3 fringe all stars for the same money. It's the artificially low max contract that makes it such a tragedy when a superstar moves on in this league.

[Agenda42]

Agenda, I agree with you on the max contract, but unfortunately neither the players nor the owners want that. The owners don't want to tie the entire cap to one player, and the players don't want to squeeze out the middle class. You would have to come up with another way that both sides could agree to realistically.

I'm pretty skeptical that it can be done currently. Neither side demonstrated any interest in competitive balance in the previous CBA negotiations. In order to get something done on the topic, what I think they need is a continuation of the trend of small market teams struggling to sell tickets.

I do have some other ideas on how to improve competitive balance, but inevitably they will bother one part of the league or another. Try these on for size:

1) Share all TV revenue equally. One of the big drivers of financial inequality in the league right now is the vastly different local TV contracts, and in particular the Lakers have a gigantic one that currently enables them to pretty much ignore the new improved luxury tax.

2) Make Bird rights non-transferable. If you want to resign or extend a player you traded for, you'll need the cap space or another exception to do it.

[FrenchieBully]

Hard cap PLUS no max on player contracts is the only way. As long as there are max contracts that artifically lower the price of great players than they can join together and play for a team even with a hard cap. You just fit as many max contract players plus veteran minimum players on a team.

However if there is no max contract than you would be having Lebron making 30 million off of a 55 million hard cap. Wade and Bosh aren't going to be playing for peanuts while Lebron rakes it in.

Game theory occuring might cause them to all take equal pay similar to what occured last time. However instead each losing out on 2 million, they woul be losing out on 15 million!

[nykballa2k4]

Agenda, I agree with you on the max contract, but unfortunately neither the players nor the owners want that. The owners don't want to tie the entire cap to one player, and the players don't want to squeeze out the middle class. You would have to come up with another way that both sides could agree to realistically.

I'm pretty skeptical that it can be done currently. Neither side demonstrated any interest in competitive balance in the previous CBA negotiations. In order to get something done on the topic, what I think they need is a continuation of the trend of small market teams struggling to sell tickets.

I do have some other ideas on how to improve competitive balance, but inevitably they will bother one part of the league or another. Try these on for size:

1) Share all TV revenue equally. One of the big drivers of financial inequality in the league right now is the vastly different local TV contracts, and in particular the Lakers have a gigantic one that currently enables them to pretty much ignore the new improved luxury tax.

2) Make Bird rights non-transferable. If you want to resign or extend a player you traded for, you'll need the cap space or another exception to do it.

Revenue is not something that should be shared evenly. Franchises like Lakers and Knicks are worth more because of the added revenue. Again, get rid of caps on max contracts and teams in general. Luxury tax (a harsh one) will cause the "profit sharing" and also discourage super teams.

[nykballa2k4]

Agenda, I agree with you on the max contract, but unfortunately neither the players nor the owners want that. The owners don't want to tie the entire cap to one player, and the players don't want to squeeze out the middle class. You would have to come up with another way that both sides could agree to realistically.

I'm pretty skeptical that it can be done currently. Neither side demonstrated any interest in competitive balance in the previous CBA negotiations. In order to get something done on the topic, what I think they need is a continuation of the trend of small market teams struggling to sell tickets.

I do have some other ideas on how to improve competitive balance, but inevitably they will bother one part of the league or another. Try these on for size:

1) Share all TV revenue equally. One of the big drivers of financial inequality in the league right now is the vastly different local TV contracts, and in particular the Lakers have a gigantic one that currently enables them to pretty much ignore the new improved luxury tax.

2) Make Bird rights non-transferable. If you want to resign or extend a player you traded for, you'll need the cap space or another exception to do it.

Revenue is not something that should be shared evenly. Franchises like Lakers and Knicks are worth more because of the added revenue. Again, get rid of caps on max contracts and teams in general. Luxury tax (a harsh one) will cause the "profit sharing" and also discourage super teams.

[pspot]

couldn't you have a system where teams are only allowed to have x number of players that account for y of the salary cap?

i.e. can only have 1 player that accounts for up to 25%
can only have 2 players that account for up to 15%
can only have 4 players that account for up to 10%

Heat have a total of 77 million
Lebron can make up to 19.25
Wade and Bosh can only make up to 11.55

for players to coordinate playing together they'd have to really make a financial sacrifice and wealth is distributed more evenly amongst players and all teams will be able to retain a star with the 25% max

something like that

also i once heard the idea about luxury tax penalties could be paid to divisional teams only. It was an idea for MLB with the huge discprencies but it could work for the NBA.

[clevceltics]

Hard cap PLUS no max on player contracts is the only way. As long as there are max contracts that artifically lower the price of great players than they can join together and play for a team even with a hard cap. You just fit as many max contract players plus veteran minimum players on a team.

However if there is no max contract than you would be having Lebron making 30 million off of a 55 million hard cap. Wade and Bosh aren't going to be playing for peanuts while Lebron rakes it in.

Game theory occuring might cause them to all take equal pay similar to what occured last time. However instead each losing out on 2 million, they woul be losing out on 15 million!

What does this really accomplish? You want to spread talent so thin that players will leave the league altogether.

Lastly, you make it seem like everyone wants to watch these junk teams all across the league. You basically want to create 30 Orlando Magic's with DHoward except there arent 30 DHowards. In your proposed league you are going to lose alot of fans simply upon the fact that the quality of most teams will go down. The NCAA has a ton of parity and their ratings are jack during the regular season. Yeah the tourney gets high ratings but alot of that has to do with the nature of the tourney. It would be a flat disaster having to watch that UConn vs Butler game 6 or 7 times.

[Ditchweed]

Hard cap PLUS no max on player contracts is the only way. As long as there are max contracts that artifically lower the price of great players than they can join together and play for a team even with a hard cap. You just fit as many max contract players plus veteran minimum players on a team.

However if there is no max contract than you would be having Lebron making 30 million off of a 55 million hard cap. Wade and Bosh aren't going to be playing for peanuts while Lebron rakes it in.

Game theory occuring might cause them to all take equal pay similar to what occured last time. However instead each losing out on 2 million, they woul be losing out on 15 million!

What does this really accomplish? You want to spread talent so thin that players will leave the league altogether.

Lastly, you make it seem like everyone wants to watch these junk teams all across the league. You basically want to create 30 Orlando Magic's with DHoward except there arent 30 DHowards. In your proposed league you are going to lose alot of fans simply upon the fact that the quality of most teams will go down. The NCAA has a ton of parity and their ratings are jack during the regular season. Yeah the tourney gets high ratings but alot of that has to do with the nature of the tourney. It would be a flat disaster having to watch that UConn vs Butler game 6 or 7 times.

No, it's the reverse, teams would gain more fans. Far more people are attached to their local team rather than individual players or the league. A more balanced leagues means more local fans.

[countrybama24]

Hard caps make it harder to retain max contract players. The home team has to be able to overpay otherwise the player will take an offer with better non-contract benefits (more desirable cities to live in, greater endorsement opportunities etc).

The only way to avoid super teams it to eliminate free agency for franchise players, IE franchise tag.

Hard cap PLUS no max on player contracts is the only way.

Hard caps create an artificial max anyways. If both teams are limited in any way, the team with intangible benefits will win out.

Franchise tag is the only way.