This new CBA is awful

life_saver · Post #41 » by **life_saver** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 6:04 pm

I actually like it

Dacost · Post #42 » by **Dacost** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:14 pm

Yea as fan of small market team this has been amazing so far.

BigDan245 · Post #43 » by **BigDan245** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:21 pm

It's been the best change the NBA has made in years

Post #44 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:24 pm

Love it. Most fun FA start in years and their aren’t even good FAs lol

Myth · Post #45 » by **Myth** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:24 pm

I love what the new CBA has done so far. I agree that I would like modifications that are less penalizing for teams re-signing their own draft picks, or re-signing players that have already been on the Team for 3+ years, but overall I like the CBA.

Chapelchilla · Post #46 » by **Chapelchilla** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:29 pm

I like it too. Shouldn't have some teams with billionaire owners able to double up the cap while stockpiling talent because they don't care about $ or are in bigger markets.

morosis · Post #47 » by **morosis** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:30 pm

behold the price of parity. and we aren't even seeing all the implications yet. we will only know what the new CBA's true impact is when all contracts on all teams were negotiated with current rules in place.

so far, it is doing what it is supposed to do. prevent teams from "buying" championships. right now our sense is that its also preventing teams from being "built the right way organically" as well, but thats also because we arent seeing the totality of roster construction and spending given these constraints.

Dubnation · Post #48 » by **Dubnation** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:31 pm

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

Well, the thing is the NFL is not a good example. It's pretty easy to predict the playoff contenders and Superbowl contenders year after year.

Post #49 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:32 pm

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

But at the same time, we're living in a reality where Luke Kornet is being paid $41m, which also seems insane.

CoP · Post #50 » by **CoP** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:35 pm

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

Over the last 25 years, there have been:
- 12 different champions in the NBA, 6 of which won multiple
- 13 different champions in the NFL, 7 of which won multiple
- 14 different champions in the NHL, 7 of which won multiple
- 16 different champions in the MLB, 6 of which won multiple

The idea that the NFL has this great parity is a myth. The most parity over the last 25 years has been in the sport that has no salary cap.

Post #51 » by **Rafael122** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:45 pm

I'm indifferent, here's why.

Boston - can we all agree that they didn't need to sign Jrue Holiday to an extension? The initial thought was "well this saves some money on the cap" and it didn't happen and they had to trade him anyway. It felt unnecessary especially when they knew what was coming up.

The overall point and I'm bunching Boston into this, is that a lot of these teams have done an absolute terrible job at drafting. Let's do a 10 year draft period for Boston:

2015 - Rozier (not on team), Hunter/Micket/Thornton (out of the league)
2016 - Jaylen Brown, Yabusele (now with New York), Zizic (out of the league). 2nd round picks did nothing
2017 - Tatum, Ojeleye/Allen/Bird ( out of the league)
2018 - Robert Williams (with Portland)
2019 - Romeo Langford, Grant Williams, Tremont Waters. Langford and Waters are out of the league and Grant is with Charlotte?
2020 - Nesmith (couldn't develop), Pritchard, Bane, Madar. Only Pritchard remains
2021 - no 1st. Begarin not with the team.
2022 - no 1st. Davison on the team, fringe player
2023 - Phillips - traded to Wizards, now on Bulls
2024 - Sheierman is a rotational piece

Jury is out on 2025 and Hugo Gonzalez.

They hit on Tatum and Brown, they won a ring, but I think this can work within the confines of the apron stuff if you draft well. As you can see in the last 10 years, their hit rate is abysmal. If you're going to have 4 guys making all the money, you better have 4 guys that are either on rookie deals or 10-15 million deals that can round out the roster. Indiana is a great example of that.

Yank3525 · Post #52 » by **Yank3525** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:47 pm

LeBronSpaghetti wrote:So if the same teams win every year it’s bad but if new teams win every year that’s bad too. Got it!

Basically fans like the OP want to reward the richest owners instead of the current system which rewards the most intelligent GM. I’ll take the latter 10 times out of 10.

But it doesn't though.

Boston was built the "right way" and still ended up blowing up their team. OKC will have to make some big decisions in a couple of years.

Patches Perry · Post #53 » by **Patches Perry** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:47 pm

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.

Bingo. Let drafted and homegrown talent count less against the cap. I've been beating this drum for like 15 years though lol.

Otherwise, the current CBA is fine by me.

Post #54 » by **dockingsched** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:52 pm

Patches Perry 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.

Bingo. Let drafted and homegrown talent count less against the cap. I've been beating this drum for like 15 years though lol.

Otherwise, the current CBA is fine by me.

This would be such a big incentive to tank tank tank to draft high.

Ryoga Hibiki · Post #55 » by **Ryoga Hibiki** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:54 pm

Yank3525 wrote:
LeBronSpaghetti wrote:So if the same teams win every year it’s bad but if new teams win every year that’s bad too. Got it!

Basically fans like the OP want to reward the richest owners instead of the current system which rewards the most intelligent GM. I’ll take the latter 10 times out of 10.

But it doesn't though.

Boston was built the "right way" and still ended up blowing up their team. OKC will have to make some big decisions in a couple of years.

Boston was not going to keep the team together anyway, most likely. They would have still had to pay 200+m of tax in a lost year. Not happening.
Only Balmer or the Warriors are doing that.

Patches Perry · Post #56 » by **Patches Perry** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 7:56 pm

dockingsched wrote:
Patches Perry 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.

Bingo. Let drafted and homegrown talent count less against the cap. I've been beating this drum for like 15 years though lol.

Otherwise, the current CBA is fine by me.

This would be such a big incentive to tank tank tank to draft high.

It could be tiered similar to rookie scale contracts. #1 doesn't get as big of a discount as #10, etc.

GSP · Post #57 » by **GSP** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 8:24 pm

Sucks what happened to our team but 7 different champs in 7 straight seasons for the first time ever including some who never won before. Orlando and Detroit have a chance to make the finals somehow next season. More teams, franchises, smaller markets having a shot at competing for a title isnt the worst thing

the_process · Post #58 » by **the_process** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 8:49 pm

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

Nope. The PA would never agree to a straight hard cap, therefore we have this to get to a hard cap in a roundabout way.

Indomitable · Post #59 » by **Indomitable** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 9:07 pm

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

It will get worse

DonaldSanders · Post #60 » by **DonaldSanders** » Tue Jul 1, 2025 9:08 pm

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.

Fully agree. If you drafted them, you deserve to keep them.

And from a fan's standpoint, it's more fun when the league has continuity. If you have to keep breaking up teams, it ruins identity. We want parity so small markets have a chance, but their best chance is actually to just draft well. And if you do draft exceptionally well, if you don't have an owner willing to pay huge penalties, you don't get to keep all your drafted guys.