Around the NBA - Offseason Edition

[Fat Kat]

Read on Twitter

[LookToShoot]

40 year old LeBron eating up 40% of the Lakers' cap space.

[Guano]

I mean, starting next year they'll have almost 110 million dedicated to two players. Then another 90 million dedicated to three more. So probably.

The new cap rules are definitely not conducive to teams sticking together.

The lack of continuity will have a terrible impact on ratings in the long run.

Sports fans are invested in stories and having a league in constant flux diminishes the narrative power of the league.

I find Adam Silver's steering of the league to be really weak, with a constant focus on the short-term and the superfluous. The NBA's trending in the wrong direction imo.

This new CBA is too extreme and it will eventually hurt the product.

i get what you're saying. the masses love super teams. it has appeal. but as a fan of a team that has 1 superstar and a really talented roster around it - i kinda fck with this new cba - especially after seeing a team constructed like the last one win it all. and i'm willing for the nba brand to suffer if it means i see the knicks win it all. FCK EM.

[Jeffrey]

DeRozan doesn't want the MLE... I'm hoping he goes to Detroit for 20m+ per year. We might have a chance to get that 1st round pick from DET.

[Chanel Bomber]

I mean, starting next year they'll have almost 110 million dedicated to two players. Then another 90 million dedicated to three more. So probably.

The new cap rules are definitely not conducive to teams sticking together.

The lack of continuity will have a terrible impact on ratings in the long run.

Sports fans are invested in stories and having a league in constant flux diminishes the narrative power of the league.

I find Adam Silver's steering of the league to be really weak, with a constant focus on the short-term and the superfluous. The NBA's trending in the wrong direction imo.

This new CBA is too extreme and it will eventually hurt the product.

i get what you're saying. the masses love super teams. it has appeal. but as a fan of a team that has 1 superstar and a really talented roster around it - i kinda fck with this new cba - especially after seeing a team constructed like the last one win it all. and i'm willing for the nba brand to suffer if it means i see the knicks win it all. FCK EM.

My point wasn't about the superstars/superteams as much as the ability to keep the teams around them.

With such a strong emphasis on parity, it will be harder to build exceptional teams and I think the result will consequently be a more mediocre product.

It's fun to see great teams compete in May and June and I think this CBA makes it more challenging to build those teams let alone keep them together. Denver is an example. We just lost iHart after going all in and there was nothing we could do about it. Boston will likely need to revamp their roster a year after winning a championship because of the salary mass.

We may see more and more flash-in-the-pan type teams and I don't think this makes for compelling stories or a successful product.

[Chanel Bomber]

I mean, starting next year they'll have almost 110 million dedicated to two players. Then another 90 million dedicated to three more. So probably.

The new cap rules are definitely not conducive to teams sticking together.

The lack of continuity will have a terrible impact on ratings in the long run.

Sports fans are invested in stories and having a league in constant flux diminishes the narrative power of the league.

I find Adam Silver's steering of the league to be really weak, with a constant focus on the short-term and the superfluous. The NBA's trending in the wrong direction imo.

This new CBA is too extreme and it will eventually hurt the product.

Having a stealth hard cap is the dumbest thing I've seen from the NBA, especially with salaries skyrocketing. Roleplayers are now being paid anywhere between 23 to 45 mil. None of this makes any sense.

Franchises are being compressed towards mediocrity. You need great teams to offer great basketball to the viewing public and this new CBA is making it increasingly hard to build a great team or to keep one together. Perhaps at some point salaries and player valuation will adjust across the league to mitigate this issue but we're clearly not at that stage.

[Guano]

The lack of continuity will have a terrible impact on ratings in the long run.

Sports fans are invested in stories and having a league in constant flux diminishes the narrative power of the league.

I find Adam Silver's steering of the league to be really weak, with a constant focus on the short-term and the superfluous. The NBA's trending in the wrong direction imo.

This new CBA is too extreme and it will eventually hurt the product.

i get what you're saying. the masses love super teams. it has appeal. but as a fan of a team that has 1 superstar and a really talented roster around it - i kinda fck with this new cba - especially after seeing a team constructed like the last one win it all. and i'm willing for the nba brand to suffer if it means i see the knicks win it all. FCK EM.

My point wasn't about the superstars/superteams as much as the ability to keep the teams around them.

With such a strong emphasis on parity, it will be harder to build exceptional teams and I think the result will consequently be a more mediocre product.

It's fun to see great teams compete in May and June and I think this CBA makes it more challenging to build those teams let alone keep them together. Denver is an example. We just lost iHart after going all in and there was nothing we could do about it. Boston will likely need to revamp their roster a year after winning a championship because of the salary mass.

We may see more and more flash-in-the-pan type teams and I don't think this makes for compelling stories or a successful product.

is the product really going to be mediocre if a team can't be kept together for a long time or is it better to have multiple teams that have an actual chance to win it all.

I'd love to have been able to keep iHart, but i'm also glad that it's going to be difficult for other teams to have 3 max cats and run a conference for half a decade. that sht is lame as hell. I kinda like going into a season knowing that there are more than 3 teams with a legit shot to win it all. but i'm also not a serial killer so





*i reserve the right to change my opinion on this topic when i'm watching sims play 30+ mins a night

[Jalen Bluntson]

The lack of continuity will have a terrible impact on ratings in the long run.

Sports fans are invested in stories and having a league in constant flux diminishes the narrative power of the league.

I find Adam Silver's steering of the league to be really weak, with a constant focus on the short-term and the superfluous. The NBA's trending in the wrong direction imo.

This new CBA is too extreme and it will eventually hurt the product.

i get what you're saying. the masses love super teams. it has appeal. but as a fan of a team that has 1 superstar and a really talented roster around it - i kinda fck with this new cba - especially after seeing a team constructed like the last one win it all. and i'm willing for the nba brand to suffer if it means i see the knicks win it all. FCK EM.

My point wasn't about the superstars/superteams as much as the ability to keep the teams around them.

With such a strong emphasis on parity, it will be harder to build exceptional teams and I think the result will consequently be a more mediocre product.

It's fun to see great teams compete in May and June and I think this CBA makes it more challenging to build those teams let alone keep them together. Denver is an example. We just lost iHart after going all in and there was nothing we could do about it. Boston will likely need to revamp their roster a year after winning a championship because of the salary mass.

We may see more and more flash-in-the-pan type teams and I don't think this makes for compelling stories or a successful product.

We lost Shart because we didn't have his full Bird rights and OKC had a ton of money to spend. Nothing to do with the CBA.

The league was already weak with the superteam era. Instead of addressing that they fugged around with the draft odds. It was so boring knowing who was going to the Finals every year.

I don't really care for the apron stuff but, you can still sign your players to extensions and manage your cap accordingly. Players won't be taking the max and forcing trades. The pick hoarding will probably slow down a lot too. Teams will value them more. I haven't tried to grasp the impact these rules will have on the league yet. It's hard enough trying to figure out how our team can maneuver through them and get a backup PG.

[MrDollarBills]

My thing is, if you're gonna hardcap after a certain point, the 2nd apron needs to be much higher with the way player salaries are increasing.

I mean Derrick White of all people just got 30m per. OG got what, 45? Hartenstein got 31. What sense does it make to have the 2nd apron so low compared to what 2nd tier, non all star level guys are commanding on the open market?

[The Vo Show]

My thing is, if you're gonna hardcap after a certain point, the 2nd apron needs to be much higher with the way player salaries are increasing.

I mean Derrick White of all people just got 30m per. OG got what, 45? Hartenstein got 31. What sense does it make to have the 2nd apron so low compared to what 2nd tier, non all star level guys are commanding on the open market?

Pretty sure that these big contracts for role players will be bad very soon (particularly Hartenstein's). The adjustment, in theory, should be to pay these non-stars a lot less since star players will generally command the max unless these players stop caring about the max and start taking less money than they are worth in order to build a better team.

Or (and), the cap increases so much in the future that this year is somewhat of a strange year due to a new cba that takes into account the new tv deal that hasn't kicked in yet.

[Chanel Bomber]

i get what you're saying. the masses love super teams. it has appeal. but as a fan of a team that has 1 superstar and a really talented roster around it - i kinda fck with this new cba - especially after seeing a team constructed like the last one win it all. and i'm willing for the nba brand to suffer if it means i see the knicks win it all. FCK EM.

My point wasn't about the superstars/superteams as much as the ability to keep the teams around them.

With such a strong emphasis on parity, it will be harder to build exceptional teams and I think the result will consequently be a more mediocre product.

It's fun to see great teams compete in May and June and I think this CBA makes it more challenging to build those teams let alone keep them together. Denver is an example. We just lost iHart after going all in and there was nothing we could do about it. Boston will likely need to revamp their roster a year after winning a championship because of the salary mass.

We may see more and more flash-in-the-pan type teams and I don't think this makes for compelling stories or a successful product.

is the product really going to be mediocre if a team can't be kept together for a long time or is it better to have multiple teams that have an actual chance to win it all.

I'd love to have been able to keep iHart, but i'm also glad that it's going to be difficult for other teams to have 3 max cats and run a conference for half a decade. that sht is lame as hell. I kinda like going into a season knowing that there are more than 3 teams with a legit shot to win it all. but i'm also not a serial killer so





*i reserve the right to change my opinion on this topic when i'm watching sims play 30+ mins a night

Will you let me complain in peace or nah

[Wildcat]

DeRozan doesn't want the MLE... I'm hoping he goes to Detroit for 20m+ per year. We might have a chance to get that 1st round pick from DET.

Dude really going the Sprewell route.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

My thing is, if you're gonna hardcap after a certain point, the 2nd apron needs to be much higher with the way player salaries are increasing.

I mean Derrick White of all people just got 30m per. OG got what, 45? Hartenstein got 31. What sense does it make to have the 2nd apron so low compared to what 2nd tier, non all star level guys are commanding on the open market?

It's to spread out talent, teams will have a core 3 and the guys around those players will rotate. The goal of the NBA seems to be that they're going to penalize you if you horde picks like the Thunder have, or you try and trade your way into getting as many stars as possible.

In the long run I think it'll work out better for the league, you'll still have a superteam rise eventually, it'll probably be a team that has a young player(s) who is incredibly good right away so they can stack the deck on his rookie contract. The Thunder are doing that now, the Spurs will attempt to and the Magic are as well.

[Capn'O]

Apparently the Bronny contract put the Lakers over the 2nd apron. Amazing.

[thebuzzardman]

My thing is, if you're gonna hardcap after a certain point, the 2nd apron needs to be much higher with the way player salaries are increasing.

I mean Derrick White of all people just got 30m per. OG got what, 45? Hartenstein got 31. What sense does it make to have the 2nd apron so low compared to what 2nd tier, non all star level guys are commanding on the open market?

So the NBA can be more like Hockey, where teams have to keep getting rid of key players every year?

[Guano]

My point wasn't about the superstars/superteams as much as the ability to keep the teams around them.

With such a strong emphasis on parity, it will be harder to build exceptional teams and I think the result will consequently be a more mediocre product.

It's fun to see great teams compete in May and June and I think this CBA makes it more challenging to build those teams let alone keep them together. Denver is an example. We just lost iHart after going all in and there was nothing we could do about it. Boston will likely need to revamp their roster a year after winning a championship because of the salary mass.

We may see more and more flash-in-the-pan type teams and I don't think this makes for compelling stories or a successful product.

is the product really going to be mediocre if a team can't be kept together for a long time or is it better to have multiple teams that have an actual chance to win it all.

I'd love to have been able to keep iHart, but i'm also glad that it's going to be difficult for other teams to have 3 max cats and run a conference for half a decade. that sht is lame as hell. I kinda like going into a season knowing that there are more than 3 teams with a legit shot to win it all. but i'm also not a serial killer so





*i reserve the right to change my opinion on this topic when i'm watching sims play 30+ mins a night

Will you let me complain in peace or nah

ofc

[MrDollarBills]

Apparently the Bronny contract put the Lakers over the 2nd apron. Amazing.

For real??? Lmaoooooo

Did they even sign anyone outside of him? Wow

[Capn'O]

Apparently the Bronny contract put the Lakers over the 2nd apron. Amazing.

For real??? Lmaoooooo

Did they even sign anyone outside of him? Wow

Read on Twitter

There's some backtracking now because LeBron may have taken slightly under the max to prevent this.

[MrDollarBills]

Apparently the Bronny contract put the Lakers over the 2nd apron. Amazing.

For real??? Lmaoooooo

Did they even sign anyone outside of him? Wow

Read on Twitter

There's some backtracking now because LeBron may have taken slightly under the max to prevent this.

I was kind of shocked LeBron signed for as much as he did considering he still wants to compete, so that makes sense if he is taking less.

[DOT]

For real??? Lmaoooooo

Did they even sign anyone outside of him? Wow

Read on Twitter

There's some backtracking now because LeBron may have taken slightly under the max to prevent this.

I was kind of shocked LeBron signed for as much as he did considering he still wants to compete, so that makes sense if he is taking less.

I think he was only taking significantly less if they could get Klay, I don't think anyone else moved the needle enough or would be cheap enough to justify taking less

Cause the difference would be negligible at this point.