RealGM

These teams are actually pushing back on salary demands. In these instances, there's no casually paying them what they want "because someone else will", or it's "the going rate" or to avoid hurting a player's feelings.

Teams know the salary limits, they just have to remember them when passing out deals, not just overpay and try to figure it out later.

Laimbeer wrote:These teams are actually pushing back on salary demands. In these instances, there's no casually paying them what they want "because someone else will", or it's "the going rate" or to avoid hurting a player's feelings.

Teams know the salary limits, they just have to remember them when passing out deals, not just overpay and try to figure it out later.

I'm all for this.

It’s moreso the CBA is so harsh that no teams actually even have the money available to offer these contracts more than there being “pushback” from teams I think.

Not sure these are the best examples. Giddey and Kuminga are RFA's and are clearly not anywhere near max-worthy players to begin with, even before this CBA's rules were implemented. KD is ancient. And ATL's apprehension to wanting to max Young is understandable given he's been there for 7 years and they've only had one "successful" season in that time (only time they finished above .500). So not wanting to max two guys who are RFA and clearly not max players, another guy who is at the tail end of his career and will be 37 at the start of the season (who is also injury prone now), and another guy who has only managed one season above .500 in 7 tries is not because of the current CBA, imo.

I also am fairly sure some desperate team would throw a max at KD for a year or two or Young if they had the money to do it

Bornstellar wrote:Not sure these are the best examples. Giddey and Kuminga are RFA's and are clearly not anywhere near max-worthy players to begin with, even before this CBA's rules were implemented. KD is ancient. And ATL's apprehension to wanting to max Young is understandable given he's been there for 7 years and they've only had one "successful" season in that time (only time they finished above .500). So not wanting to max two guys who are RFA and clearly not max players, another guy who is at the tail end of his career and will be 37 at the start of the season (who is also injury prone now), and another guy who has only managed one season above .500 in 7 tries is not because of the current CBA, imo.

I also am fairly sure some desperate team would throw a max at KD for a year or two or Young if they had the money to do it

Sure, but at the same time - there was a formula at one point of almost every respectable RFA player getting any money he wanted just based on clubs-to-agents connections, the same with extensions for all-star level players. And the explanation was it's just teams playing it nicely with players in players' empowerment era.

So I agree with the OP, we may see a significant change there, it already happened with Houston which was able to negotiate a better extension deals with Green or Sengun (especially him) last summer.

The Master wrote:

Bornstellar wrote:Not sure these are the best examples. Giddey and Kuminga are RFA's and are clearly not anywhere near max-worthy players to begin with, even before this CBA's rules were implemented. KD is ancient. And ATL's apprehension to wanting to max Young is understandable given he's been there for 7 years and they've only had one "successful" season in that time (only time they finished above .500). So not wanting to max two guys who are RFA and clearly not max players, another guy who is at the tail end of his career and will be 37 at the start of the season (who is also injury prone now), and another guy who has only managed one season above .500 in 7 tries is not because of the current CBA, imo.

I also am fairly sure some desperate team would throw a max at KD for a year or two or Young if they had the money to do it

Sure, but at the same time - there was a formula at one point of almost every respectable RFA player getting any money he wanted just based on clubs-to-agents connections, the same with extensions for all-star level players. And the explanation was it's just teams playing it nicely with players in players' empowerment era.

So I agree with the OP, we may see a significant change there, it already happened with Houston which was able to negotiate a better extension deals with Green or Sengun (especially him) last summer.

I agree there's been some shift towards financial caution, but I also definitely don't think it's a simple 'every decent RFA got overpaid cuz empowerment in the past, now that's done.' That seems like a bad-history caricature. There have always been many players in this Giddey-Cam-Grimes range that teams didn't want to sign to big RFA deals and who didn't end up with outsized contracts. And the times that did happen usually involved specific contexts/reasons for why the overpay happened (like CLE overpaying Tristan Thompson cuz they had no way to replace him and were contenders, GSW overpaying Poole for similar reasons). No one just shelled out huge contracts to okay players to keep things cool with agents, leverage and situation have always governed those negotiations.

The big shifts now seem to be just that contracts are understood to be less moveable, and big-budget teams have very real and hard limits on spending. The two are related and in any case are leading to a general situation where there are fewer chances of a medium guy getting a huge deal. Teams with big budgets can't overpay a useful RFA to keep their squads together, and teams with smaller budgets are more worried about moving large contracts and other opportunity costs. For example basically all AS-level players tended to get extensions because they were generally always tradeable, short of a major injury. That seems to be shifting some and, even if we've still seen shaky deals like Lavine getting traded easily, I think teams will be at least a little more likely now to not re-sign some lower-level AS guys if there's no plan to win around them.

Salary management and depth have become more important than ever. I love it because it rewards teams that can develop their own players and make smart salary decisions based on need and relative worth. The biggest crippler of teams is overpaying guys like Trae Young because you need so much more money to cover his limitations that you literally can't afford him-- you'd be better off letting him go.

of course, not every team is trying to win so some teams just hold their noses and pay a guy like Trae. Atlanta is actually in a position to level up so it's a real decision that matters now. As a fan of depth and rotation decisions, it makes the league much more interesting to me than just stargazing.

It finally matters that overpaying a guy by $10 million means you lose a critical rotation player.

Laimbeer wrote:These teams are actually pushing back on salary demands. In these instances, there's no casually paying them what they want "because someone else will", or it's "the going rate" or to avoid hurting a player's feelings.

Teams know the salary limits, they just have to remember them when passing out deals, not just overpay and try to figure it out later.

Teams aren’t pushing back anything. They literally can’t offer money they don’t have since it’s now tied up to overpaying players they already have.

If they had the cap space, you better believe guys like Giddey, Kuminga, etc would have already signed.

Memories wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:These teams are actually pushing back on salary demands. In these instances, there's no casually paying them what they want "because someone else will", or it's "the going rate" or to avoid hurting a player's feelings.

Teams know the salary limits, they just have to remember them when passing out deals, not just overpay and try to figure it out later.

Teams aren’t pushing back anything. They literally can’t offer money they don’t have since it’s now tied up to overpaying players they already have.

If they had the cap space, you better believe guys like Giddey, Kuminga, etc would have already signed.

I’m not so sure. Even the offers out there for Kuminga ($22m/yr) are not very strong. We don’t have any reports of any offers for Giddey. Other teams have interest in these guys but they a) don’t want to pay them much and b) aren’t offering much in a trade which implies there isn’t exactly strong demand for Kuminga or Giddey.

It’s not like the interested trade teams are offering $30m. They’re still trying to get these guys cheap too. It might be temporary but there seems to be a market shift for non-all-star level players. I think the prevalence of contracts around or below the MLE given out this off-season backs this up too.

Restricted free agents have no market. There are no teams with cap space. Player's union screwed up with this one.

Celts17Pride wrote:Restricted free agents have no market. There are no teams with cap space. Player's union screwed up with this one.

Yup, the NBAPA isn't as weak as the NFLPA but it is pretty weak. The CBA reflects the owners wishes. Management has all the bargaining power with the players so free agency is basically dead.

As a fan I think that is a really bad thing but I know others disagree. For me, championship teams having to break up their core sucks as does teams having complete control over players. But again I know other fans disagree as many sports fans seemingly think free agency itself is bad.

Guys can take the QO then. Start making teams lose "assets" they refused to move previously like Kuminga.

The Master wrote:

Bornstellar wrote:Not sure these are the best examples. Giddey and Kuminga are RFA's and are clearly not anywhere near max-worthy players to begin with, even before this CBA's rules were implemented. KD is ancient. And ATL's apprehension to wanting to max Young is understandable given he's been there for 7 years and they've only had one "successful" season in that time (only time they finished above .500). So not wanting to max two guys who are RFA and clearly not max players, another guy who is at the tail end of his career and will be 37 at the start of the season (who is also injury prone now), and another guy who has only managed one season above .500 in 7 tries is not because of the current CBA, imo.

I also am fairly sure some desperate team would throw a max at KD for a year or two or Young if they had the money to do it

Sure, but at the same time - there was a formula at one point of almost every respectable RFA player getting any money he wanted just based on clubs-to-agents connections, the same with extensions for all-star level players. And the explanation was it's just teams playing it nicely with players in players' empowerment era.

So I agree with the OP, we may see a significant change there, it already happened with Houston which was able to negotiate a better extension deals with Green or Sengun (especially him) last summer.

Tyler Johnson getting 50m and it being matched comes to mind.

Hopefully we'll see some market correction

Celts17Pride wrote:Restricted free agents have no market. There are no teams with cap space. Player's union screwed up with this one.

No teams with capspace is not the union fault.

Teams allocated money other assets and are prepping for windows potentially have a better FA market i.e 2027.

sp6r=underrated wrote:

Celts17Pride wrote:Restricted free agents have no market. There are no teams with cap space. Player's union screwed up with this one.

Yup, the NBAPA isn't as weak as the NFLPA but it is pretty weak. The CBA reflects the owners wishes. Management has all the bargaining power with the players so free agency is basically dead.

As a fan I think that is a really bad thing but I know others disagree. For me, championship teams having to break up their core sucks as does teams having complete control over players. But again I know other fans disagree as many sports fans seemingly think free agency itself is bad.

Restricted free agents never had a market unless you poison pill contract a player like Rockets did with Omer Asik back when Morey was there.

Or do a massive overpay.

Laimbeer wrote:These teams are actually pushing back on salary demands. In these instances, there's no casually paying them what they want "because someone else will", or it's "the going rate" or to avoid hurting a player's feelings.

Teams know the salary limits, they just have to remember them when passing out deals, not just overpay and try to figure it out later.

It will also distribute talent, because the aprons make it prohibitive to just hold on to players just because you don't want to give anything up.

Celtics have had to move on and make tough decisions on players because they've just had to. This probably better for them as they will get younger and instead of waiting too long getting on the treadmill.

CBA continues to be trash and sucks.

Pointgod wrote:CBA continues to be trash and sucks.

I like it, but I'm a Cavs fan, so my team being good probably helps. If your GM isn't good at drafting and making good deals, you probably hate the current CBA.

CBA is great and I love it

The current CBA allows players to have absolute guaranteed contracts. They are by far the highest paid professional players as an aggregate. Do you think the avg person knows who Patrick Williams is? Well he got 90 million from the Bulls. The players without contracts need to look at themselves before anything else. Heck, the rookie contracts basically means anyone who is drafted in 1st round is set for life. The idea that it is trash is absurd when you look how good it is for everyone playing and not just the exceptions who want more than what they merit.