RealGM

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

The new CBA suckssssss.

I don't get why the middle tier players would ever agree to this. Basically the "stars" all get $50-70M now and everyone else is gets like 2/$20

The aprons confound me. Tax amount above the cap, fine. Don’t create levels that impose other restrictions.

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.

It’s definitely a mess. Don’t see how it continues this way.

GIMME_DATT wrote: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

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.

Last 2 been bad.
I think in both cases one of the sides didnt even read paper and just signed it.

Shock Defeat wrote:

GIMME_DATT wrote: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

i hear that but

1. i'm not sure that parity is what people like about the nfl
2. the nba has had success with dynasties, and a case can be made that they've relatively struggled in eras of parity
3. the "parity" of the last several years might have more to do with injuries than the structure of the CBA
4. the league's marketing needs to adjust if teams are going to have max 2-3 year windows with their core rosters

itrsteve wrote: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.

Every team will feel it not just OKC. The Thunder have a lot more draft picks in the warchest to restock their talent though.

bfchs123 wrote:I don't get why the middle tier players would ever agree to this. Basically the "stars" all get $50-70M now and everyone else is gets like 2/$20

heatwillbeback wrote:The aprons confound me. Tax amount above the cap, fine. Don’t create levels that impose other restrictions.

I think this CBA definitely showed some player union incompetence. Cheap owners probably love it, cause they have excuse not to spend.

mg wrote:

itrsteve wrote: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.

Every team will feel it not just OKC. The Thunder have a lot more draft picks in the warchest to restock their talent though.

Hitting on draft picks is pretty hard, but I wonder what could be their plan, will they just trade Chet or J-dubb for picks, possibly before even their second contract kicks in? I mean, it would be unprecedented, but there is some logic in that.

bfchs123 wrote:I don't get why the middle tier players would ever agree to this. Basically the "stars" all get $50-70M now and everyone else is gets like 2/$20

yes because the mid tier players are *wildly* overpaid and the stars are wildly underpaid due to the max. Making it harder to have multiple stars will reward teams that can *consistently* build well.

There's going to be some growing pains but NFL parity will help the NBA in the long run (and even then, the NFL has to do something about quarterbacks being way too important, though not a second before Jayden Daniels winning a Super Bowl)

I ♡ new CBA

UcanUwill wrote:

mg wrote:Every team will feel it not just OKC. The Thunder have a lot more draft picks in the warchest to restock their talent though.

Hitting on draft picks is pretty hard, but I wonder what could be their plan, will they just trade Chet or J-dubb for picks, possibly before even their second contract kicks in? I mean, it would be unprecedented, but there is some logic in that.

Hell yeah it's hard. I just used OKC as an example but it just seems screwed up to have these CBA tools like designated rookie max extensions then screw teams for using them.

Not to unhash the Dallas/Luka stuff but they were staring down a historic extension and there's no way that didn't have a factor in future planning.

Pretty tough task to tell a upper-tier NBA player that you're unwilling to give them every last dime they're entitled to.

UcanUwill wrote:

bfchs123 wrote:I don't get why the middle tier players would ever agree to this. Basically the "stars" all get $50-70M now and everyone else is gets like 2/$20

heatwillbeback wrote:The aprons confound me. Tax amount above the cap, fine. Don’t create levels that impose other restrictions.

I think this CBA definitely showed some player union incompetence. Cheap owners probably love it, cause they have excuse not to spend.

I have yet to see some numbers supporting the notion that this CBA is bad for the middle level players

Not enjoying it at all, personally.

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

What good teams are breaking up?

The ones who's stars tore their achilles.

What other teams could you possibly be talking about?

Meanwhile, teams like Denver, Houston, Atlanta, etc are going for it.

I like it. What’s the point of having a salary cap if the only real constraint is how much owners want to spend? It’s not a hard cap so good teams do have some ability to stay together, but team building is all about tradeoffs