Official Spec Thread: Regular Season

[drsd]

I don't give a crap how much money players make, only reason why it matters in nba is salary cap.

IF Brown plays in league where salary cap is sub $140M and he makes $60M a year, it means his salary eats 45% of salary cap.

Celtics for 2024-25 season will have $116M invested into 3 players.

Under those contions it's simply impossible to operate. And those conditions might do execlly opposite of what you said.

If you are nba team that knows your star will become $60M a year player, there is good chance that you won't resign anybody if it's not for very little money. So in near future we might see Suns type buildups. 3-4 elite players and rest of a group made out of minimum salary guys.

We already know Harris & Middelton aren't payed based on fact what they do, but based on fact team's can't afford anybody better. if new CBA was activated under their exstensions, odds are, both would get traded instad of resigned and probably by default would be forced to sign for less ( or enter UFA and make way less ).

Current CBA, to me, makes no sense.

One outcome will eventually be a team that tries to assemble a bunch of high end players on cost effective deals, over having any max players at all. Money ball is gonna come to the NBA very soon!

The reality is that the new CBA is going to break monopolies and dynasties. No matter what happens to mean vs. mode salary lines.

We are on a five year run where all five teams are different. The last time that happened was decades ago.

From the ownership perspective, the new CBA will keep team below the luxury tax (albeit at a cost increase and a lower percent take). The owners really, really care about collective, not individual salaries to predict annual budgets. Whether there is normality or skewness (in mathematical terms) in salary averages only matters in how it effects the next CBA. FInancial stability will exist in the NBA in that all teams will now be from 90% to 110% of the cap line moving forward.

p.s. the Brown contract will kill Boston as the league moves to the next CBA.

[yoyojw17]

You take up 35% of the salary cap... and then go... "I NEED HELP"? lmao

If someone is legit about winning they will find a happy grey area and not the max just cuz they could. if you are single handedly winning the majority of games... then shoot... i get it. But good to pretty damn good players who can be replaced in some way shape or form... should not be eating up that kind of space.

That contract is taking up 40%-50% of it currently, not 35%.

I didn't sit down to do the math. haha... just threw out a number. not sure what it will be against the projected cap the following season. haha.... 40-50% of the cap... uhmmmm... yeah... i'd have to pass. lol... trade bait right there... he's not a luka, lebron, curry level player.

[pepe1991]

All this, to me, seems to be going into " 2 max players + team of minimum contract players" type of roster bulid. There simply wont' be middle ground of players to sign. You won't look to add some Bojan Bogdanovic; Vucevic, Robinson, Levert, Struss, Isaac type of middle ground, slight gamble type of deals. They will all be payed near league's minimum, because any other type of money will put your team step closer to second apron of punishment for going over cap.

I expect that at least some teams will try a model of one star + solid supporting cast.

If it were up to me, they would just collectively bargain it: Each team gets only one max contract, with the next-highest possible contract being 25% below the max. The max contract exists outside of the salary cap, so teams don't have to save up space to offer one, and a max contract can only be traded for another max contract (so most would expire without being traded).

But in a moment when second best player, who isn't "star" puts up "star" numbers, he'll get overpayed as well.

Look at guys like Ingram and McCullum, they ain't top tear stars, but they make that money.

And we live in era of basketball where stats are so ugly inflated that every team thinks they have 2 sure shot allstars because they all put some 20-5-5 stats.

[Catledge]

All this, to me, seems to be going into " 2 max players + team of minimum contract players" type of roster bulid. There simply wont' be middle ground of players to sign. You won't look to add some Bojan Bogdanovic; Vucevic, Robinson, Levert, Struss, Isaac type of middle ground, slight gamble type of deals. They will all be payed near league's minimum, because any other type of money will put your team step closer to second apron of punishment for going over cap.

I expect that at least some teams will try a model of one star + solid supporting cast.

If it were up to me, they would just collectively bargain it: Each team gets only one max contract, with the next-highest possible contract being 25% below the max. The max contract exists outside of the salary cap, so teams don't have to save up space to offer one, and a max contract can only be traded for another max contract (so most would expire without being traded).

But in a moment when second best player, who isn't "star" puts up "star" numbers, he'll get overpayed as well.

Look at guys like Ingram and McCullum, they ain't top tear stars, but they make that money.

And we live in era of basketball where stats are so ugly inflated that every team thinks they have 2 sure shot allstars because they all put some 20-5-5 stats.

Sure, but the point is that the second player would have to leave to take that money from another team.

[Skin]

Just wait until the Arabs do to the NBA what they did to the PGA...

[KillMonger]

Read on Twitter

[drsd]

Well managed teams will thrive in the new CBA.

What is clear is that a quick-fix of buying 3-5 players in one offseason to reset a team: those days are over. That is horrible news for Boston, LAL and NYKs.

[Skybox]

Read on Twitter

He looks really good…but he doesn’t look like a PG. ..more like an AAU stud.

[89Magicfan]

Read on Twitter

Probably our best 2 guard.

[tiderulz]

Well managed teams will thrive in the new CBA.

What is clear is that a quick-fix of buying 3-5 players in one offseason to reset a team: those days are over. That is horrible news for Boston, LAL and NYKs.

well, its going to be hard to keep more than 1 real star. and the ones not quite stars, they will still look for star money

[Fortune Teller]

I don't give a crap how much money players make, only reason why it matters in nba is salary cap.

IF Brown plays in league where salary cap is sub $140M and he makes $60M a year, it means his salary eats 45% of salary cap.

Celtics for 2024-25 season will have $116M invested into 3 players.

Under those contions it's simply impossible to operate. And those conditions might do execlly opposite of what you said.

If you are nba team that knows your star will become $60M a year player, there is good chance that you won't resign anybody if it's not for very little money. So in near future we might see Suns type buildups. 3-4 elite players and rest of a group made out of minimum salary guys.

We already know Harris & Middelton aren't payed based on fact what they do, but based on fact team's can't afford anybody better. if new CBA was activated under their exstensions, odds are, both would get traded instad of resigned and probably by default would be forced to sign for less ( or enter UFA and make way less ).

Current CBA, to me, makes no sense.

One outcome will eventually be a team that tries to assemble a bunch of high end players on cost effective deals, over having any max players at all. Money ball is gonna come to the NBA very soon!

The reality is that the new CBA is going to break monopolies and dynasties. No matter what happens to mean vs. mode salary lines.

We are on a five year run where all five teams are different. The last time that happened was decades ago.

From the ownership perspective, the new CBA will keep team below the luxury tax (albeit at a cost increase and a lower percent take). The owners really, really care about collective, not individual salaries to predict annual budgets. Whether there is normality or skewness (in mathematical terms) in salary averages only matters in how it effects the next CBA. FInancial stability will exist in the NBA in that all teams will now be from 90% to 110% of the cap line moving forward.

p.s. the Brown contract will kill Boston as the league moves to the next CBA.

On paper it seems like this will decimate the NBA's middle class. If the model to win a championship is 2 star players, and those 2 stars are likely to consume around 75-80% of your salary cap, then you are likely filling the rest of your roster with minimum-salary guys.

I like the Moneyball example. I don't know if it could work in the NBA like it did in baseball, because the NBA is obviously so much more star-driven. Only 5 guys on the court at one time means one special player can make a huge difference. Can Moneyball beat Giannis, Steph, Jokic, etc.? The alternative is a team like Orlando re-signs its own stars (like Paolo) for equal money just to hold on to them, and everyone plays the same game of my 2 overpaid stars against your 2 overpaid stars.

I guess we'll see how it plays out, but I could see a labor issue on the horizon. The vast majority of pro basketball players are not stars. They control majority vote in any collective bargaining. If their paychecks decline while players like Jaylen Brown rake in Bezos money then there will be a problem. Which, by the way, if reflective of what's happening in this country on a larger scale. UPS, teamsters, writers, actors, etc. all on strike. The wealth gap has steadily increased since the 1950s and the middle class has gradually disappeared.

[drsd]

.... they will still look for star money

And this is the rub. Scouting and management to find stars on the cheap vs. over paying stat-stars will set the next 10 years of this league.

In WeltPark I trust!

..

[Skybox]

I don't give a crap how much money players make, only reason why it matters in nba is salary cap.

IF Brown plays in league where salary cap is sub $140M and he makes $60M a year, it means his salary eats 45% of salary cap.

Celtics for 2024-25 season will have $116M invested into 3 players.

Under those contions it's simply impossible to operate. And those conditions might do execlly opposite of what you said.

If you are nba team that knows your star will become $60M a year player, there is good chance that you won't resign anybody if it's not for very little money. So in near future we might see Suns type buildups. 3-4 elite players and rest of a group made out of minimum salary guys.

We already know Harris & Middelton aren't payed based on fact what they do, but based on fact team's can't afford anybody better. if new CBA was activated under their exstensions, odds are, both would get traded instad of resigned and probably by default would be forced to sign for less ( or enter UFA and make way less ).

Current CBA, to me, makes no sense.

One outcome will eventually be a team that tries to assemble a bunch of high end players on cost effective deals, over having any max players at all. Money ball is gonna come to the NBA very soon!

The reality is that the new CBA is going to break monopolies and dynasties. No matter what happens to mean vs. mode salary lines.

We are on a five year run where all five teams are different. The last time that happened was decades ago.

From the ownership perspective, the new CBA will keep team below the luxury tax (albeit at a cost increase and a lower percent take). The owners really, really care about collective, not individual salaries to predict annual budgets. Whether there is normality or skewness (in mathematical terms) in salary averages only matters in how it effects the next CBA. FInancial stability will exist in the NBA in that all teams will now be from 90% to 110% of the cap line moving forward.

p.s. the Brown contract will kill Boston as the league moves to the next CBA.

On paper it seems like this will decimate the NBA's middle class. If the model to win a championship is 2 star players, and those 2 stars are likely to consume around 75-80% of your salary cap, then you are likely filling the rest of your roster with minimum-salary guys.

I like the Moneyball example. I don't know if it could work in the NBA like it did in baseball, because the NBA is obviously so much more star-driven. Only 5 guys on the court at one time means one special player can make a huge difference. Can Moneyball beat Giannis, Steph, Jokic, etc.? The alternative is a team like Orlando re-signs its own stars (like Paolo) for equal money just to hold on to them, and everyone plays the same game of my 2 overpaid stars against your 2 overpaid stars.

I guess we'll see how it plays out, but I could see a labor issue on the horizon. The vast majority of pro basketball players are not stars. They control majority vote in any collective bargaining. If their paychecks decline while players like Jaylen Brown rake in Bezos money then there will be a problem. Which, by the way, if reflective of what's happening in this country on a larger scale. UPS, teamsters, writers, actors, etc. all on strike. The wealth gap has steadily increased since the 1950s and the middle class has gradually disappeared.

I LOVE Moneyball...the book, the movie, the concept...but it's a lot harder to apply to basketball, with only 5 guys on the court. Stars win in the playoffs. Good system players with great coaching can take you pretty far, but there's a ceiling. Most recent example I can remember is Budenholzer's Hawks who sent 4 guys to the All-Star game...4 guys who never were before and never would be again, but they worked so well together that I want to say they won 50 regular season games, but got knocked out pretty early in the playoffs.

All Stars...Jeff Teague, Al Horford, Kyle Korver, Paul Milsap!!! Nice players-not a Supermax in sight. The playoffs reveal the truth. Kind of like how Kobe can sleep on defense 75% of the time, but lockdown ANYONE when it matters. Stars win.

Will be interesting to watch how the NBA shifts...maybe an Iverson-model, built around one superstar, is more plausible. On the other hand, Brown is closer to elite supporting player than superstar, IMO. Will be very interesting to see what Franz' next contract looks like. Can Weltman keep the fiscal future under control or is it going to spiral into insanity? (every good player can't be a max-just can't).

[pepe1991]

In basketball it's way more valuable to have Jokic or GIannis and 4 C level role players than 5 - B+ players.

[drsd]

In basketball it's way more valuable to have Jokic or GIannis and 4 C level role players than 5 - B+ players.

That thesis will be tested. One outlier in this is what if a bunch of B+ players are willing to take pay-cuts to play with Jokić or Antetokounmpo, etc. That would upend what Mr. Silver is trying to do here.

There will always be a "Clyde Drexler" that has already gotten paid, still in peak, but fanatically wants a ring at the cost of millions of dollars. Find those guys. But after finding Jokić or Antetokounmpo. That's kind of step-1 in this plan after all!

[thelead]

In basketball it's way more valuable to have Jokic or GIannis and 4 C level role players than 5 - B+ players.

I disagree. Jokic an Giannis had better than C level guys next to them when they won their rings. Murray is not a C level player. 2021 Holiday and Middleton were not C level players. Also, how many teams have we ever seen with 5 B+ players? The problem with that model today is that B+ players get near/full max contracts.

[pepe1991]

In basketball it's way more valuable to have Jokic or GIannis and 4 C level role players than 5 - B+ players.

I disagree. Jokic an Giannis had better than C level guys next to them when they won their rings. Murray is not a C level player. 2021 Holiday and Middleton were not C level players. Also, how many teams have we ever seen with 5 B+ players? The problem with that model today is that B+ players get near/full max contracts.

B level players are basically fringe allstars.

A level players in this sense will be max contract players.

[Skin]

Read on Twitter

That growth motivation behind Anthony Black being selected is real.

[drsd]

B level players are basically fringe allstars.

A level players in this sense will be max contract players.

And-1

For context, There are three types of max contract: super max, "normal" max, and max rookie extension.

Lets say that on average the league will have 8 super max players, 20 max players and 10 rookie max extension players, then this is just under 2 max players per team. This has level-B players as those players in the 40-100 best NBA players.

Some names as an example of B-level, by PER: Aaron Gordon, Jonas Valančiūnas, Jrue Holiday, Brandon Ingram, Nikola Vučević, and Brook Lopez. Basically, to win an NBA title moving forward, it will all be about getting several of these sorts of players for not-max-level money to join the max player or two on a roster.

[Skin]

In basketball it's way more valuable to have Jokic or GIannis and 4 C level role players than 5 - B+ players.

But neither is good enough for a championship. You need at least 2 A level players.... unless your name is Dirk.