Matching Salaries in Trades...what's the point?

[crzy]

Can someone explain to me why this stupid rule is in place? What is the reason this rule was created?

It is the main reason why there are "wink-wink" deals like Ilgauskas returning to Cleveland in 30 days, or Gooden possibly returning to Dallas.

[Jersey Generals]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

[britblazerdude]

Because we don't want to be like Euro-soccer or the MLB where only a select amount of teams have championships.

[crzy]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

[crzy]

Because we don't want to be like Euro-soccer or the MLB where only a select amount of teams have championships.

The luxury tax is a sufficient deterrent against that.

How many owners make moves just to avoid paying the luxury tax?

[10scott10]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

the NFL has a hard cap, which prevents it. The NBA has a soft cap and you are allowed to make trades if you are over the cap.

[Zin5]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

Teams already do this with expirings. Lakers would have already traded their leftover expirings (about $10M iirc) if they were willing to just flat out buy everything. As long as the lux tax is in place, teams wouldn't take on more contracts than they could afford.

Because we don't want to be like Euro-soccer or the MLB where only a select amount of teams have championships.

Number of unique NBA teams that have won the championship since 1990: 7 (Pistons, Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Celtics)
Number of unique MLB teams that have won the championship since 1990: 12 (Reds, Twins, Blue Jays, Braves, Yankees, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Angels, Red Sox, White Sox, Cardinals, Phillies)

Soccer: Don't care.

[lakerfan10770]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

You're right, they just cut them....

[Relentless88]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

lol no guaranteed salaries in NFL. players just get cut just like that.

[Heat3]

Ensuring that salaries match is a way to keep the trades balanced. Sometimes you end up with scrubs making lots of money, but most of the time it is assumed that the player is worth his money. So you need to get equal salary back to get equal worth back. In theory anyway...

[JustBlaze]

Because of the salary cap. If that rule wasn't in place, you could literally see teams calling up financially strained teams and saying, "You can send us however much salary you want, as long as it comes with (insert all-star/potential player here)." Teams could buy their way to the top, and there would be nothing stopping them from having a robust pay roll.

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

Not a silly argument. An NFL team has to be under the cap limit if they are going to take on salary like that without sending any out. Pretty much no NBA teams are under the cap.

[Jersey Generals]

That's a silly argument.

There are no trade restrictions in football. And teams don't trade superstars making $15 million per year for a practice squad player just to dump salary.

No, like others have already mentioned, they just cut the players.

[KobeFan]

I like the MLB/MLS system.

It's awesome to see teams stacking all-stars. It builds up the ultimate series. Can your team full of young talented players take out a star-studded team? When it happens its epic.

In the NFL it feels like any team can win any week (which kind of waters down the excitement, imo), and there's not much trading in either the NBA or NFL because of the restrictions -- which makes following teams in the off-season kind of dull/boring.

[JustBlaze]

I like the MLB/MLS system.

It's awesome to see teams stacking all-stars. It builds up the ultimate series. Can your team full of young talented players take out a star-studded team? When it happens its epic.

In the NFL it feels like any team can win any week (which kind of waters down the excitement, imo), and there's not much trading in either the NBA or NFL because of the restrictions -- which makes following teams in the off-season kind of dull/boring.

So knowing what teams will be the best before hand is more exciting than not knowing and having to wait and see, and watch the teams decide on the playing field instead of in a conference room signing papers and making trades? I know that's just a opinion, but that is an oxymoron.

[KobeFan]

Yes. It's like knowing Darth Vader is the ultimate villian heading into a star wars movie; everybody knows he's going to live until the end until the ultimate show down happens. And if he doesn't live until the end it's BIG NEWS.

In football too much luck plays into short 16 game seasons (and salary caps where all teams have an equal amount of star power). Any team can win at any time. It makes following the team in the off-season boring because you know it doesn't matter what the team does, they'll have as equal a chance to make it to the playoffs either way.

[xkirax]

I like the MLB/MLS system.

It's awesome to see teams stacking all-stars. It builds up the ultimate series. Can your team full of young talented players take out a star-studded team? When it happens its epic.

In the NFL it feels like any team can win any week (which kind of waters down the excitement, imo), and there's not much trading in either the NBA or NFL because of the restrictions -- which makes following teams in the off-season kind of dull/boring.

So knowing what teams will be the best before hand is more exciting than not knowing and having to wait and see, and watch the teams decide on the playing field instead of in a conference room signing papers and making trades? I know that's just a opinion, but that is an oxymoron.

You do know MLB has had more unique champions then any other sport in america right? in the NBA 9 out of the past 11 championships have been won by these players Shaq Kobe, Duncan .
99 Duncan
00 Shaq Kobe
01 Shaq Kobe
02 Shaq Kobe
03 Duncan
04 ...
05 Duncan
06 Shaq
07 Duncan
08 ...
09 Kobe

You do know Baseball has had the most unique champions this decade then any other sport? so who has the real pariday and dont even try 2 bring up all times cuz baseball wins in that also so gg.

[THROWBACK_91]

Because we don't want to be like Euro-soccer or the MLB where only a select amount of teams have championships.

we basically have that

[Heat3]

Baseball is different. The difference between the greatest in the game and the scrubs isn't that much. It's not like the best will hit 10 hr a game while a scrub will always strike out. Even the scrubs hit hrs once in a while. And while they don't do it as often, there are so many scrubs that there's always one stepping up. It's much more likely that a team of stars can get beat. Heck baseball always has exhibitions between college and MLB teams and the college teams sometimes win.

The nature of the game evens things out a lot. It's almost like Golf. Not so in the NBA or NFL.

[Doo Doo_Brown]

You do know MLB has had more unique champions then any other sport in america right? in the NBA 9 out of the past 11 championships have been won by these players Shaq Kobe, Duncan .

That's because a single dominant player in the NBA has a huge influence on the outcome of every game he plays in - no other sport even comes close. Actually I take that back. Baseball pitchers have even more influence (think no hitter). But they only play in like 30 games so their overall effect is not as great as a dominant basketball player.

[KobeFan]

Baseball is different. The difference between the greatest in the game and the scrubs isn't that much. It's not like the best will hit 10 hr a game while a scrub will always strike out. Even the scrubs hit hrs once in a while. And while they don't do it as often, there are so many scrubs that there's always one stepping up. It's much more likely that a team of stars can get beat. Heck baseball always has exhibitions between college and MLB teams and the college teams sometimes win.

The nature of the game evens things out a lot. It's almost like Golf. Not so in the NBA or NFL.

In baseball there are 162 games. Over the course of that many games the teams with the best talent will surface.

The playoffs are shortened (best of 5, best of 7) series.

At that point, anybody can win.