RealGM

Been reading about the Celtics sale and comments from Wyc Grousbeck got my attention. I knew the 2nd apron was quite punitive but maybe didn't pay enough attention to it.

First there's the luxury tax. We know about that part. For example, the Celts are over the 2nd apron and Sam Hauser's $10M per year deal will actually cost the team... $90M per year! That's a 900% tax if my fingers are working. More than I realized.

But the biggest punishments/challenges are in the basketball penalties and trade restrictions...

"Let me put a pin in that balloon too," Grousbeck said when asked about the challenges of staying in the luxury tax in an interview with WEEI in Boston. "It’s not the luxury tax bill, it’s the basketball penalties. The new CBA was designed by the league to stop teams from going crazy."

"The basketball penalties mean that it’s even more of a premium now to have your basketball general manager be brilliant and lucky," Grousbeck said. "Because you have to navigate because you can’t stay in the second apron, nobody will, I predict, for the next 40 years of the CBA, no one is going to stay in the second apron more than two years."

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/279735/Outgoing-Celtics-Owner-Wyc-Grousbeck-Basketball-Penalties-Will-Drive-Changes-Not-Tax-Bill


This is from a Celtics article but it applies to all 2nd apron teams, who really can't do much of anything....

The Celtics are currently dealing with a number of restrictions as a second apron team. Here’s a list of the more notable restrictions:

—Can’t acquire a player via sign-and-trade

—Can’t use mid-level or biannual exception in free agency

—Can’t sign a player who was making more than mid-level via buyout

—Can’t aggregate two or more player salaries in a trade

—Can’t send out cash in a trade

—A future first round pick is frozen seven years out (unable to be traded) when a team is in second apron.

—Frozen first round picks could be moved to end of first round if a team stays above second apron in three of five years

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2025/03/wyc-grousbeck-drops-big-hint-on-boston-celtics-offseason-plans-amid-sale.html

Anyway... this seems like too much to me, but maybe I'm just cranky because my team is dealing with it haha. Like, I get the point but it's a little overboard imo.

If Grousbeck is correct that no team will stay over the 2nd apron for more than 2 years, do we like that the best teams are basically going to be broken up so often? "Parity" is cool on paper but kinda boring in practice imo. What do you guys think?

As a Knicks fan whose team is bumping against it, yes. As a fan of a lower level team I’d probably like it, even though I’m not a huge fan of parity.

As, the NHL’s artificial parity…the gimmick point for winning after regulation, the hard cap, playoff refs letting less talented teams “slow down” more talented teams…has absolutely pushed me away from the sport despite it having been my favorite to play and the sport I know the most pros in.

So I’m not the target of this change.

It's way harsh, even if you exceed it and not in the title chase (hello Phoenix). Freezing a 1st rounder 7 years out, can't use biannual or midlevel exception, have to pay back 110% of every dollar spent.

Boston is gonna pay about $400 million in BRI, but at least they're a title contender
Phoenix is gonna pay about $200 million in BRI, but they're far from a title contender

There's a big difference between those two payments.

I miss the superteam era.

You can thank the 2022 Warriors. Joe Lacob threw it in everyone's face he didn't care how much he spent or the penalties, because he could afford both.

The only way the NBA thought they could slow teams from blowing past the salary cap or luxury tax was add basketball penalties. The financial penalties clearly were not doing the trick.

A lot of the trades this season were pointed directly at the new CBA, as the reason.

The 2nd apron was essentially the owners way of getting the players to accept a hard cap without accepting a hard cap.

Yes. The main purpose of the 2nd apron was to prevent these owners with major pockets from spending their way into winning Championships. Think of the Clippers and Warriors for example. Or making it a lot harder for big market teams to get these Superstar through trades or Free Agency( that has already has failed on deaf ears). The issue with the CBA is that this handicap small market team as much if not more than the big market teams.For example, the Timberwolves basically allowed themselves to regress because of the 2nd tax apron penalties and the need to stay under. They basically caused them to trade Karl Anthony Towns for Julius Randle and a late 1st round pick. That trade doesn't happen in the old CBA. I don't think the Mavericks would be desperation mode to trade Luka for way less than his actual value without the new CBA rules in place.The OKC Thunder will run into this problem at some point and may be forced to trade one of Chet Hologren or Jalen Williams just to stay under the 2nd apron as they will demand a lot of money on their rookie extension. We heard about JA Morant possibly getting this off season. The Grizzles may also would had to trade JJJ if he played enough games to eligible for a supermax. The new CBA doesn't much at all to force big market teams to draft/create their stars in house, instead of trading them/getting them through Free Agency, while punishing small markets teams who draft well by making harder for them to keep their current teams for longer periods of time.

No, I'm fine with it.

There were really three options:

1. Hard cap- This would force teams to break up, period.

2. No cap- Just let the rich teams run roughshod over everyone else.

3. Middle ground- This is essentially the 2nd apron. You can keep a team together, at a steep price only worth it for true contenders (or maybe even just dynastic success, tbh)

Personally I think the middle ground was the right choice. Hard cap would be hated even more and no cap essentially tuns 25 franchises into farm teams. Second apron gives franchises options but they need to think long and hard before committing.

The thing that is way overboard is the pick situation because in all likelihood those picks will be valuable as they are cost restricted ways to build your team.

There have been issues with the idea of basically buying a championship ever since implementation of the rookie scale and true free agency. You had teams like the JailBlazers,Knicks and Mavs that were consistently over the cap with inflated budgets. Ironically enough they never won but doing that. Now with the current structure of revenue that comes in, there is more money than ever. I am of the opinion that you should keep your team and not be penalized for having a home grown player become a superstar. It is the reason why Luka was traded, because he would have been able to get a FU Supermax contract. I would propose having the home grown supermax contracts be counted differently compared to a traded or signed off of free agency max contract.

I am dummy on all these things, but is it fair observation to suggest that these rules are made so owners would have an excuse to not spend anymore? No one wants to be in 2nd apron, and its not because of tax, but because of all these restrictions, so owners have a valid reason to point out why they wont spend - hey, it puts us at disadvantage if I spend...

Boston no matter who owns the team will be at crossroads, because that team will be too expensive to keep, someone will have to go, some major player I mean, not just Sam Houser, thats just reality, dynasties are not very possible anymore. Same thing will happen to OKC at one point too.

I am all for parity, but I think it sucks that even home grown teams who did everything the right way, will not be able to keep their talent. I imagine it should be some rule, that if you drafted the player or smth, 20% of his salary does not count under these apron rules, at least something like that.

It definitely is too harsh, teams shouldn’t be punished for wanting to win and pay their players fairly. 2nd apron mostly punishes the desperate small market teams that feel pressure to build a contender around their star, Denver and Milwaukee get boned not the big markets who don’t need to depend on catching lightning in a bottle to contend. This is toxic to the game and will also wipe out the NBA middle class, it’s going to end up as supermax guys and then a bunch of minimum salary players even with rising revenues. Straight up gratuitous the punishments with picks and other signings. Way worse than hard cap. There isn’t an issue with teams buying championships in the NBA, just a totally fake problem that didn’t need solving.

I'm OK with the 2nd apron, but I do think there should be a mild carve-out for players that are retained that the team drafted themselves. We should be encouraging teams that draft and keep talent, the NBA is way more fun when teams stick together for longer periods. And teams should be rewarded for drafting well.

I think its pretty good overall, prevents most superteams from long dynastic runs, which is better in my opinion and offers more chances for other teams to win. It does hinder some trading and free agency but honestly I think it will make teams / gms smarter as they learn to manage the cap better and hopefully cutback on giving out ridiculous salaries and opera winfreying the max contracts "you get a max, you get a max, everybody gets a max!"

Maybe teams need to think twice before extending guys like MPJ to 40 million a year...

bisme37 wrote:Been reading about the Celtics sale and comments from Wyc Grousbeck got my attention. I knew the 2nd apron was quite punitive but maybe didn't pay enough attention to it.

First there's the luxury tax. We know about that part. For example, the Celts are over the 2nd apron and Sam Hauser's $10M per deal deal will actually cost the team... $90M per year! That's a 900% tax if my fingers are working. More than I realized.

But the biggest punishments/challenges are in the basketball penalties and trade restrictions...

"Let me put a pin in that balloon too," Grousbeck said when asked about the challenges of staying in the luxury tax in an interview with WEEI in Boston. "It’s not the luxury tax bill, it’s the basketball penalties. The new CBA was designed by the league to stop teams from going crazy."

"The basketball penalties mean that it’s even more of a premium now to have your basketball general manager be brilliant and lucky," Grousbeck said. "Because you have to navigate because you can’t stay in the second apron, nobody will, I predict, for the next 40 years of the CBA, no one is going to stay in the second apron more than two years."

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/279735/Outgoing-Celtics-Owner-Wyc-Grousbeck-Basketball-Penalties-Will-Drive-Changes-Not-Tax-Bill


This is from a Celtics article but it applies to all 2nd apron teams, who really can't do much of anything....

The Celtics are currently dealing with a number of restrictions as a second apron team. Here’s a list of the more notable restriction:

—Can’t acquire a player via sign-and-trade

—Can’t use mid-level or bi-annual exception in free agency

—Can’t sign a player who was making more than mid-level via buyout

—Can’t aggregate two or more player salaries in a trade

—Can’t send out cash in a trade

—A future first round pick is frozen seven years out (unable to be traded) a team is in second apron.

—Frozen first round picks could be moved to end of first round if a team stay above second apron in three of five years

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2025/03/wyc-grousbeck-drops-big-hint-on-boston-celtics-offseason-plans-amid-sale.html

Anyway... this seems like too much to me, but maybe I'm just cranky because my team is dealing with it haha. Like, I get the point but it's a little overboard imo.

If Grousbeck is correct that no team will stay over the 2nd apron for more than 2 years, do we like that the best teams are basically going to be broken up so often? "Parity" is cool on paper but kinda boring in practice imo. What do you guys think?

IMO, the only important second apron restrictions are not being able to aggregate salaries in a trade, and freezing the draft pick 7 years out.

Some of the items listed are first apron restrictions and some were restricted in the previous CBA. For instance, can't acquire a player in a S&T is a 1st apron restriction held over from the previous CBA. (What's new is a second Apron can't send out a player in S&T.) Likewise the bi-annual exception, a 1st apron restriction, held over from previous CBA. The buy-out provision is a first apron restriction.

The aggregation is annoying, but teams get around it by bringing in more teams. The frozen draft pick disappears by teams getting out of the 2nd apron. Not sending (or receiving) cash doesn't seem too onerous to me.

Even as a Warrior fan, I think the 2nd apron improves the league.

Hauser went from a two way player to a rotation player and it seems harsh to penalize a team too much for this internal growth.

You know the system is wacky when teams can’t afford their role players anymore.

You can still build superteams and yiu can still have long contending windows.
Just you must be able to cycle on the role players, trading the guys that will become too expensive on time.
You can still pay your stars, you can't afford to pay you 4-8 guy as much as before.

bisme37 wrote:Been reading about the Celtics sale and comments from Wyc Grousbeck got my attention. I knew the 2nd apron was quite punitive but maybe didn't pay enough attention to it.

First there's the luxury tax. We know about that part. For example, the Celts are over the 2nd apron and Sam Hauser's $10M per deal deal will actually cost the team... $90M per year! That's a 900% tax if my fingers are working. More than I realized.

But the biggest punishments/challenges are in the basketball penalties and trade restrictions...

"Let me put a pin in that balloon too," Grousbeck said when asked about the challenges of staying in the luxury tax in an interview with WEEI in Boston. "It’s not the luxury tax bill, it’s the basketball penalties. The new CBA was designed by the league to stop teams from going crazy."

"The basketball penalties mean that it’s even more of a premium now to have your basketball general manager be brilliant and lucky," Grousbeck said. "Because you have to navigate because you can’t stay in the second apron, nobody will, I predict, for the next 40 years of the CBA, no one is going to stay in the second apron more than two years."

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/279735/Outgoing-Celtics-Owner-Wyc-Grousbeck-Basketball-Penalties-Will-Drive-Changes-Not-Tax-Bill


This is from a Celtics article but it applies to all 2nd apron teams, who really can't do much of anything....

The Celtics are currently dealing with a number of restrictions as a second apron team. Here’s a list of the more notable restriction:

—Can’t acquire a player via sign-and-trade

—Can’t use mid-level or bi-annual exception in free agency

—Can’t sign a player who was making more than mid-level via buyout

—Can’t aggregate two or more player salaries in a trade

—Can’t send out cash in a trade

—A future first round pick is frozen seven years out (unable to be traded) a team is in second apron.

—Frozen first round picks could be moved to end of first round if a team stay above second apron in three of five years

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2025/03/wyc-grousbeck-drops-big-hint-on-boston-celtics-offseason-plans-amid-sale.html

Anyway... this seems like too much to me, but maybe I'm just cranky because my team is dealing with it haha. Like, I get the point but it's a little overboard imo.

If Grousbeck is correct that no team will stay over the 2nd apron for more than 2 years, do we like that the best teams are basically going to be broken up so often? "Parity" is cool on paper but kinda boring in practice imo. What do you guys think?

The second apron is pretty much the stop Steve Balmer provision that was in place for a team that never amounted to anything. It’s especially harsh and punitive, especially considering that it’s going to hurt small market teams even more. The NBA has created a league where the teams that want to compete are limited in improving, even on the margins and the teams that want to tank are also limited so they just sit players instead of trading them for more assets and the game overall is just a crappy product for the fans, except for the fans of a few top teams.

Infinite Llamas wrote:Hauser went from a two way player to a rotation player and it seems harsh to penalize a team too much for this internal growth.

You know the system is wacky when teams can’t afford their role players anymore.

The Celtics are paying their 5 starters a combined $198 million starting this summer lol i do not feel one bit sad for them.

They went all in on their starters, which is fine but they shouldn't need anyone making more than league minimum off their bench.

No. Trade Sam Hauser to Charlotte or Washington. Sorry, you can't stack a roster in perpetuity. Guys want to get paid, sometimes you gotta play somewhere else.