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

[Bulls Heero 81]

In the last 10 seasons, there have been 7 different NFL teams to win the Super Bowl.
In the last 10 seasons, there have been 6 different NBA teams to win the NBA title.

What's your explanation for that? I thought the NFL had so much more parity than the NBA?

Keep looking backwards. You'll find that the NBA has the same short list of teams winning, while the NFL has different ones. Here's some numbers to compare:

15 NFL teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the 49ers, with 4 titles. Overall, 20 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 4 teams have never played in the Super Bowl.

10 NBA teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the Lakers, with 10 titles. Overall, 12 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 9 teams have never played in the Finals.

The appeal of the NFL isn't that great teams somehow don't exist. It's that every franchise has the chance to build a great team, and that your team's location and market size is not a major disadvantage in building that team.

Agenda, you're not taking in consideration to the fact that real free agency and a salary cap was not available in the NFL til the early 90's (93 if I remember correctly). Also, it was in fact the NBA that first big 4 league introduced the salary cap and the individual max contract. I wrote this earlier a few pages back that people don't really care about parity in football, never did. This is reflected in our culture in the states and the historical ratings and TV contracts. You're also not taking into consideration of the nature of the game itself. In the last 5 minutes of any game I can literally inbound the ball to Michael Jordan and isolate him while spreading the floor. He also has the power defend the best player. People need to understand if you are not football you are a niche sport. Basketball no matter what will never ever be football here or soccer internationally. Will it continue to grow? Sure, however it won't ever be where hardcore fans would like it to be among the casuals. If you want to compare it to other niche sports like hockey, boxing, mma, etc, go ahead. That's a better comparison.

[Bulls Heero 81]

All the NBA needs to do to prevent superstars from lumping together is to lift the max cap on what each individual player can make per year..

Lebron signs for 50 million + and his team has to sign nothing but role players to fill out the roster..Superstars get spread throughout the association..


The salary cap and the new luxery tax penalties will protect the payroll structure for the owners.

I like this idea. Keep a cap of $60 mil, but no individual player cap. Nice.

This won't happen. We already had this with Kevin Garnett and Michael Jordan. This what led to the first lockout. Small market owners and mid market owners don't want to keep the entire cap to one player, players on the other hand don't want to eliminate the middle class players. Come up with a real solution please.

[BadMofoPimp]

I propose the leagues superstars quit the NBA and join the AND1 league. Thus, they can just have fun showing off their talents.

[clevceltics]

All the NBA needs to do to prevent superstars from lumping together is to lift the max cap on what each individual player can make per year..

Lebron signs for 50 million + and his team has to sign nothing but role players to fill out the roster..Superstars get spread throughout the association..


The salary cap and the new luxery tax penalties will protect the payroll structure for the owners.

I like this idea. Keep a cap of $60 mil, but no individual player cap. Nice.

So you are proposing that the league adopt a policy that forces LeBron to play with nothing but d leaguers? Who is going to watch that? What your saying is that the unlucky team that drafts him basically resorts to a dleague team or lose him to a bigger market that will pay him 20 mil with huge endorsement contracts

[EvanZ]

All the NBA needs to do to prevent superstars from lumping together is to lift the max cap on what each individual player can make per year..

Lebron signs for 50 million + and his team has to sign nothing but role players to fill out the roster..Superstars get spread throughout the association..


The salary cap and the new luxery tax penalties will protect the payroll structure for the owners.

I like this idea. Keep a cap of $60 mil, but no individual player cap. Nice.

This won't happen. We already had this with Kevin Garnett and Michael Jordan. This what led to the first lockout. Small market owners and mid market owners don't want to keep the entire cap to one player, players on the other hand don't want to eliminate the middle class players. Come up with a real solution please.

Then compromise. Instead of 35% of the cap or unlimited, make the player cap something like 50% of the cap. That still leaves room for "middle-class" players.

In general, GM's need to value players better anyway. There are only a handful of players in the league worth 50% of the cap, but they're definitely worth it. Then you have second-tier players making almost as much as those first tier guys. It doesn't make sense.

LeBron *should* make at least $30M. Dwight should be making that much. Chris Paul. Dirk in his prime. Prime Wade. Durant is getting there.

But when a guy like Serge Ibaka makes $12M and LeBron makes $18M. It's all f'd up. Doesn't make sense. There's no incentive for LeBron to make $18M in a small market. There might be if it was $36M. The owners would then have to make smarter decisions about the other players.

[BadMofoPimp]

The new CBA is better than the old CBA. But, I feel and hope the next CBA is stricter with a harder cap and penalties. I can see that happening because of the deals the Knicks/Nets/Lakers have been making. So, all those who oppose a harder cap, better get ready to be disappointed.

[Bulls Heero 81]

The new CBA is better than the old CBA. But, I feel and hope the next CBA is stricter with a harder cap and penalties. I can see that happening because of the deals the Knicks/Nets/Lakers have been making. So, all those who oppose a harder cap, better get ready to be disappointed.

The new CBA hasn't even been fully implemented yet, that's why we saw of these deals take place before the real effects take place. Just take a chill pill and relax and let the CBA do it's thing before you say it's complete failure.

[nykballa2k4]

Draper needs to explain how "revenue sharing" could happen in a capless system.

Lets say a team like the Bucks are only generating $20 million in revenue to pay for players in a capless system since they have less fans because their team has no superstars since they are all in the Big City markets.

And, The Lakers are generating about $200 mil because they have all the best players. But, the Lakers salary is like $180 million and they still have bills.

Where is this so called revenue sharing in a capless system with no salary rules to make sure there is money left over to even share?

That is why dreaming up fictitious ideas of parity in a capless system is unproven success. It just won't happen here in the USA. Europe has soccer amongst nations, thus the teams generate revenue within their own country. USA is a different animal and there is theory of a capless system for the NBA would spell success for all 31 teams and any small market.

The reason this will never happen is because all 31 teams are partial owners of the NBA as a whole. The players don't own crap. They are paid employees. Thus, each team wants a chance to compete with any other team. Having a cap system in place creates an opportunity for a team to at least have a player for a few years that could put fans into the expensive arena's seats. How hard is that to understand?

My revenue sharing comes from a punitive luxury tax. The scale system in place is good. With different tax brackets you force the big market teams to pay 3x the superstar they want. That money goes to rebuilding teams who, in theory are losing money due to lack of being competitive. If big markets have all the LeBRons and Howards at fair prices (40/yr for lebron 35/year for Howard) the 6 "big market" aka heavy spending teams might be at 100 mil/season meaning maybe paying dollar for dollar over 70, 2 dollars for dollar for 85 and over so they are putting 15+30 aka 45 million into the pot apiece. 6 teams * 45 million is 270 million of revenue sharing.

[nykballa2k4]

The new CBA is better than the old CBA. But, I feel and hope the next CBA is stricter with a harder cap and penalties. I can see that happening because of the deals the Knicks/Nets/Lakers have been making. So, all those who oppose a harder cap, better get ready to be disappointed.

Harder cap will be the dumbest thing ever for sports. NBA will become more dynasty oriented since your options will be permalotto or overpay for a marginal star.

[Don Draper]

Draper needs to explain how "revenue sharing" could happen in a capless system

MLB and BPL

[Agenda42]

I like this idea. Keep a cap of $60 mil, but no individual player cap. Nice.

So you are proposing that the league adopt a policy that forces LeBron to play with nothing but d leaguers? Who is going to watch that?

You're really overstating this. The 1997-1998 Chicago Bulls paid Michael Jordan $33M and had a total roster bill of $60M. The 2004-2005 Miami Heat paid Shaq $27.7M and had a total roster bill of $59M.

The reason why the max contract idea won't fly is that it's a one man one vote union, and Dennis Rodman level guys don't want to make $4.5M a season. However, were you able to get this system past the union, the inevitable result of stars getting paid more is role players getting paid less, so you wouldn't have to worry about teams being unable to surround their superstar with effective role players.

What your saying is that the unlucky team that drafts him basically resorts to a dleague team or lose him to a bigger market that will pay him 20 mil with huge endorsement contracts

Without major structural changes to the NBA, a big market team with no star will always find a way to get one, most likely by luring him away from a small market team. This wouldn't change with the elimination of a max contract.

What would change is the behavior of stars when big market teams already have a star player. Currently, their incentives lead them to decide to team up together -- half of the all-NBA team lineup of the last season now plays in just 4 cities. With no max contract, these players would now have to choose between taking less money to play together with an established star, or taking the biggest offer to be the star of a team currently without one. The result here would be better spreading of talent in the league and thus more parity.

[DiscoLives4ever]

The reason why the max contract idea won't fly is that it's a one man one vote union, and Dennis Rodman level guys don't want to make $4.5M a season.

This is an important point in the discussion. To get through the union any "above max" solution would need to not count extra against the cap and also likely include a raising of the salary floor to ensure owners don't lower the wages of the average player.

[clevceltics]

It's not really an overstatement at all. Ok lets look at one example. LeBron James. When he was with Cleveland and before he signed his contract extension, took a franchise that was valued somewhere in the twenties in league value to top 10 in value. By the time he left the team had all types of foreign investors and was top 5 in value. The games sold out and the bars were filled on game nights for Cavs games. Had celebrity owners like Usher buying a share of the team. When he left Dan Gilbert lost an estimated 150 million when when he said he was going to Miami. The value of the team fell and gone were potential investors. The local bars would take a hit as well both downtown and throughout the area.

It can easily be argued that without the max contract LeBron would be worth close to 40 mil a year considering his impact on the local economy, the value of the team, all time high tv viewership in the local market and his ability to make Gilbert look good enough for Gilbert to get a casino in town.

So if LeBron is or could arguably be worth 40 with a salary cap of 58 million for the other at least 12 guys that must be on be roster then these guys can't more than 2 mil on average which is the vet min. So with that being said why wouldn't LeBron go to say NY and take a salary of 20 mil with the idea that he puts himself in a better position to make outside money while giving himself just a good of a chance of winning?

[BadMofoPimp]

The new CBA is better than the old CBA. But, I feel and hope the next CBA is stricter with a harder cap and penalties. I can see that happening because of the deals the Knicks/Nets/Lakers have been making. So, all those who oppose a harder cap, better get ready to be disappointed.

Harder cap will be the dumbest thing ever for sports. NBA will become more dynasty oriented since your options will be permalotto or overpay for a marginal star.

I feel it would be opposite. Because, there will be many superstar that will want that $17 million contract over the $10 million contract to play alongside another superstar. Thus, they may sign with the Smaller market team to get that $17 million and enjoy being loved by that city for being the leader of that team instead of a side kick to another superstar for less.

Case closed with parity.

[seren]

You gotta also get rid of salary restrictions. No max contracts + hard cap would certainly guarantee no superteams.

[BadMofoPimp]

You gotta also get rid of salary restrictions. No max contracts + hard cap would certainly guarantee no superteams.

OK. No max salary, no salary floor and a hard cap. I like that. And, no guaranteed contracts for either side. Lets do it.

[DiscoLives4ever]

You gotta also get rid of salary restrictions. No max contracts + hard cap would certainly guarantee no superteams.

OK. No max salary, no salary floor and a hard cap. I like that. And, no guaranteed contracts for either side. Lets do it.

While you are both right in the fact that it would be effective and owners would love it, the union would NEVER go for it.

[seren]

OK. No max salary, no salary floor and a hard cap. I like that. And, no guaranteed contracts for either side. Lets do it.

While you are both right in the fact that it would be effective and owners would love it, the union would NEVER go for it.

It was the owners who pushed for max contracts to begin with along with rookie salary scale. We had a lockout because of that in 99. Now we have a situation where the only players who are underpaid in the league are superstars and rookies. Everyone else is overpaid.

[clevceltics]

You gotta also get rid of salary restrictions. No max contracts + hard cap would certainly guarantee no superteams.

OK. No max salary, no salary floor and a hard cap. I like that. And, no guaranteed contracts for either side. Lets do it.

If that were to happen I would hope that the top player get together and collude to form like 4 real super teams and let the scraps fall where try may

[elbowthrower]

(didn't read the whole thread yet, but...)

I voted no because it's not the ONLY way. But it could be A way.