"Only way to avoid 'super teams' is to impose a hard cap."

[clevceltics]

You would have more local fans but you will lose much of the national audience. I love watching CP3 play but I really hated watching him play on the Hornets and as a matter of fact I would turn those games off because that team was uninteresting as a whole. This is coming from someone who watches games 4 or 5 nights a week starting with the east coast games and ending with the west coast games.

I will not pay money to watch every team look like the Hornets or worse just to make incompetent teams feel better about themselves.

[Minge]

The truth is – the “maximum salary” is the enabler of “super teams”. It’s the only reason that Minnesota was able to re-sign Kevin Garnett. They could pay market value. Blame the owners in that respect. The other issue is “parity” – if they wanted more of it then they would play a “best of 3” series, or a single elimination bracket style like the NCAA. However, longer series equate to higher profits for the owners. So you won’t ever see those reforms.

What’s the work around? Take this all the way back to the 60’s, when the teams that drafted the best (Boston) couldn’t lose their players in free agency, by eliminating “free agency” …

[karkinos]

What team did the 2000-2002 Lakers face that was as good as what the current Heat and Lakers teams have faced?

portland and sactown would give the heat a run for their money

[TheGarden]

I kinda wish the NBA was more like the NFL but fans are too impatient for that

Not to mention means like the Packers have a huge following while the Bucks are well the Bucks

I'd start with the draft worst team gets first pick, franchise tag, non guaranteed deals, more bonuses in contracts, 5 year rookie deals, tenders on free agents, 65mil hard cap and each team gets a minor league affiliate

[Dennis 37]

What does this really accomplish? You want to spread talent so thin that players will leave the league altogether.

Lastly, you make it seem like everyone wants to watch these junk teams all across the league. You basically want to create 30 Orlando Magic's with DHoward except there arent 30 DHowards. In your proposed league you are going to lose alot of fans simply upon the fact that the quality of most teams will go down. The NCAA has a ton of parity and their ratings are jack during the regular season. Yeah the tourney gets high ratings but alot of that has to do with the nature of the tourney. It would be a flat disaster having to watch that UConn vs Butler game 6 or 7 times.

If this were true, I would never watch my home team play, because they suck. But I do watch. In fact I watch more when they have a chance to win, so when Miami comes to town and have a 10 point lead after five minutes, I turn the channel. When the Bobcats come to town, I watch the whole game because my team has a very good chance to win.

There are far more teams without multiple stars than those with. Yet they have an audience and that audience dwindles when they know their team is going to get blown off the floor. I would argue that only the spoiled fans of perennial favorites are at risk of being lost.

Your logic about the quality of most teams going down doesn't hold water. The average talent across the league remains the same. The players are simply distributed differently. And why would a player leave the league when he could make 30 million now instead of just the maximum?

The people who complain about parity are the fans of teams who have some sort of advantage and are trying to protect it at all cost. They simply do not want to see a league where their team's championship chances can ever fall below 25%. They don't care that their are some very well run teams that never scratch 10%.

[DEEP3CL]

maybe. Franchise Tag will also help tremendously

Players will never go for a Franchise Tag, because now you're asking the owners to choose who that player should be.

[Dennis 37]

maybe. Franchise Tag will also help tremendously

Players will never go for a Franchise Tag, because now you're asking the owners to choose who that player should be.

I would allow teams to pay their own draft picks, after the rookie contract expires, whatever they want. That salary, if over the max would follow a player if traded, but the new team would have to count that entire salary as part of their cap. If a player left as a free agent, he could only get the max. Sign and trades, for over the max, would not be allowed.

[smith2373]

A hard cap can't turn horrible front offices into good ones. A hard cap won't suddenly make Sacramento & Milwaukee's front offices on par with San Antonio's, Boston's & LA's. It won't.

Stacked teams will still be formed, and if you think a hard cap can stop front offices from building stacked teams then you are delusional. The great front offices will still find a way.

[DiscoLives4ever]

maybe. Franchise Tag will also help tremendously

Players will never go for a Franchise Tag, because now you're asking the owners to choose who that player should be.

I would allow teams to pay their own draft picks, after the rookie contract expires, whatever they want. That salary, if over the max would follow a player if traded, but the new team would have to count that entire salary as part of their cap. If a player left as a free agent, he could only get the max. Sign and trades, for over the max, would not be allowed.

I think this would lead to more diva players demanding trades. I think if a player paid above the max gets traded his salary should revert to just the max. This will help keep stars from mailing it in as well

[DiscoLives4ever]

A hard cap can't turn horrible front offices into good ones. A hard cap won't suddenly make Sacramento & Milwaukee's front offices on par with San Antonio's, Boston's & LA's. It won't.

I don't think anybody is making this claim.

The goal of most posters is to level the playing field between a team like the Jazz and the Lakers, where management is fairly comparable but one side has more resources to take risks with.

[LateRoundFlyer]

To suggest the problem is officiating is absolutely absurd. To suggest officiating would change anything is asinine. The Dallas Mavericks wouldn't have won in 2011 if that were the case. The Detroit Pistons wouldn't have beat the Lakers if that were the case. Sometimes, whilst watching the Thunder play, or the Heat, I feel as if the officiating in the NBA is atrocious-- Then I realize that game-time decisions, split-second decisions have to produce erred results. I mean, I was disgusted watching LeBron's reaction to Chandler's pick, which was a glorious acting job-- I mean, I thought I was watching a man that took an axe to the neck. Nonetheless, fault isn't attributable to the officiating, here.

I think LateRoundFlyer had noteworthy suggestions-- A laissez-faire system has some very intriguing possibilities. Moreover, the concept of introducing a 'transfer and loan system', similar to football, climaxes my intrigue. Allowing a small-market team to simply "sell" a player rectifies a multitude of predicaments. However, it's an unconvincing and improbable proposition, chaperones some issues of its own, and requires a consummate restructuring of the collective bargaining agreement.

For the record, I scarcely remember claiming such an idea to be perfect, and elsewhere I have given a long list of specific transitional suggestions that should be put into play before such a truly free market system would be embraced. But if, by your own admission, such a system DOES solve more problems than it creates, is that not still a radical improvement upon what we have now?

You deem it unconvincing and improbable. Sigh... perhaps. Yes, I rather think it is actually. Unconvincing to the short term profits of incompetent owners more interested in running their organization like a popular clothing brand rather than a professional sports clubs. Unconvincing to the diehards, who can't be persuaded into anything that might suggest the NBA exists for reasons far greater than just those of a competitive nature (teams DO still need to make money, casual fans still need a reason to watch). And no doubt, the improbability of such impending change stems from the resistance on the part of both. It is of no importance to me, however. The differences between what is practical in application versus practical in realization are many. I was prompted by the topic for the former and gave suggestions in kind.

It isn't like if you were to adopt such a system that this would even be the place you'd stop at. Ideally, you'd want to completely alter the American basketball pyramid for the better. And if that sounds no more convincing than the previous aspiration, it certainly isn't for a lack of ambition. For example, what happens to the NCAA in such a system? And the simple answer to that is, as far as one could hope, it'd be gone.

For a system like this to work, you need as large a talent pool as possible while simultaneously providing enough incentive for clubs to develop said talent. America has an abundance of it, as evinced by the achievements of many of its U23 players. Once you unbundle professional sports from college selection, not only does tertiary education, as an industry, thrive with one less extracurricular lure to fund, but so does every basketball league from the minor squads to the elite sides in the NBA. Promotion and relegation would also be added sooner, rather than later -- although probably more leniently applied than it is overseas.

Long story short: there'd be no requirement to stop at the suggestions previously given. And why would you want to, if such limits artificially suppressed the growth of the sport? I certainly wouldn't, but then, I moved beyond petty arguments over parity and "competitive balance" long ago. There is a bigger picture here, not just in the transformation of one of America's top flight sports leagues, but its economy, education, and entertainment sectors as well.

"Improbable" and "unconvincing" though it may be, you can scarcely challenge the holistic approach such reforms would summon.

[clevceltics]

Ok so Miami so Miami has a bad season and no one cares cus they are a big market. Miami gets the 2nd pick in the draft. Had they had the 2nd pick the year before they would have had Durant and that would have been your so called super team. Since try didnt get a star with the 2nd pick they worked their cap to be able to attract 2 star FAs. They took two different approached bur found a way to win a title. It's called good management.

Or you could take the approach that OKC took making smart draft choices to build a team that got to the Finals. Yet you want to punish them too cus they were able to find players who are pretty good. You wantto break them up and put Westbrook on a team like the Bobcats just so that the Bobcats can have a fair shot. What you fail to mention is that the Bobcats have had a ton of high lottery picks. If fans in say Utah want to complain about opportunity, they should complain about the Bobcats having such high picks were they in the hands of say Utah they might find a player to put them over the hump

[Agenda42]

Revenue is not something that should be shared evenly. Franchises like Lakers and Knicks are worth more because of the added revenue. Again, get rid of caps on max contracts and teams in general. Luxury tax (a harsh one) will cause the "profit sharing" and also discourage super teams.

The problem with the luxury tax as a revenue sharing model is that it effectively makes the tax line a hard cap for the small market teams. You'd like to see teams spend near the salary floor while rebuilding, then be big spenders for a couple years when they have the pieces to contend. However, with the tax system, not only do you pay tax, you stop receiving tax payments. As currently constructed, it is a huge financial wall for small market teams.

This matters because championship teams simply do not exist below the tax line.

[Agenda42]

Hard caps create an artificial max anyways. If both teams are limited in any way, the team with intangible benefits will win out.

Franchise tag is the only way.

I disagree. Your logic is correct for two teams with reasonably equal rosters and cap space. However, rosters aren't equal. In a league with a hard cap and no max contract, Dwight doesn't have any interest in going to the Lakers this offseason. Probably he wants to go to someplace like Houston, which has heaps of space to give him a big contract and young value players to support him.

[smith2373]

Ok so Miami so Miami has a bad season and no one cares cus they are a big market. Miami gets the 2nd pick in the draft. Had they had the 2nd pick the year before they would have had Durant and that would have been your so called super team. Since try didnt get a star with the 2nd pick they worked their cap to be able to attract 2 star FAs. They took two different approached bur found a way to win a title. It's called good management.

Or you could take the approach that OKC took making smart draft choices to build a team that got to the Finals. Yet you want to punish them too cus they were able to find players who are pretty good. You wantto break them up and put Westbrook on a team like the Bobcats just so that the Bobcats can have a fair shot. What you fail to mention is that the Bobcats have had a ton of high lottery picks. If fans in say Utah want to complain about opportunity, they should complain about the Bobcats having such high picks were they in the hands of say Utah they might find a player to put them over the hump

EXACTLY.

It's so stupid to want punish teams like Miami, LA, San Antonio, OKC, Boston, etc. who all have great front offices and have built their teams into championship contenders by making good decisions just because of teams with bad front offices like Charlotte, Milwaukee, Sacramento, Cleveland, Orlando, etc. overpaying players, making bad trades and horrible draft decisions.

[clevceltics]

I am really trying to see how the system is unfair here. There are no rules that say you can't have top 5 picks in a certain time span. The lottery is for non playoff teams. The lottery is in place so teams don't straight tank to get the next LeBron. Cap space is available to anyone that can structure contracts to attain it.
Yes teams like ATL, Lakers, Knicks, PHX have advantages when it comes to attracting free agents bit that's life. Most big stars don't leave via FA anyways. Most leave via trade to markets that have either are in a position where they think they can win or in a place where try can market themselves more. That's human choice.
There is nothing that prevents a team from building a superteam. As if there is any such thong in today's game. I mean how much different would life in Sota had been if they never make the Ray Allen trade? Would have been pretty good if you ask me.
When looking at all the evidence I don't see a reason to hamper teams ability to acquire players anymore than the system already does.

[DEEP3CL]

maybe. Franchise Tag will also help tremendously

Players will never go for a Franchise Tag, because now you're asking the owners to choose who that player should be.

I would allow teams to pay their own draft picks, after the rookie contract expires, whatever they want. That salary, if over the max would follow a player if traded, but the new team would have to count that entire salary as part of their cap. If a player left as a free agent, he could only get the max. Sign and trades, for over the max, would not be allowed.

Now this has some reality to it to a degree. The part I put in bold would actually lead to at least smarter and more diligent trades. Teams would have to be willing to make a sound judgement on the player they're trading for. I also like not allowing sign and trades for max money.

[brownsmith89]

the most "fair" system would be blocking almost all management decisions completely. a team can't screw themselves up, and a team can't improve themselves with brilliant changes.

fire all general managers and save millions of dollars in executive salaries.

no trades, no free agent signings.

only random ping pong balls for the draft lottery. only pickups off waivers or unsigned players. all players stay with their teams for life if there is interest.

would tv ratings go up or down? would revenue go up or down?

[old rem]

There isn't any "ideal". There was a long struggle about hard cap...remember the lockout?

Seems you COULD stick another team in EACH of NY,LA,Chi...dilute the big city effect,but then...Miami is not that big. Maybe a lot of bling,strip bars and sunshine...but....the NBA wants teams in every region,in the main towns and even if you were to expand by another 6 franchises or more...you still have other factors.

Teams like the Lakers,Celtics,Knicks,and a few others have quite a bit of history. You can't really counter that, but ...picture Bill Gates buys a team for Honolulu. Betcha he can put something together.

Probably,as the punative aspects of the Lux Tax take effect...teams will find it hard to assemble a Super Team. Keep in mind....however..that Miami mostly was about 3 star players making a choice.
They could have as easily united elsewhere.

[Dennis 37]

There isn't any "ideal". There was a long struggle about hard cap...remember the lockout?

Seems you COULD stick another team in EACH of NY,LA,Chi...dilute the big city effect,but then...Miami is not that big. Maybe a lot of bling,strip bars and sunshine...but....the NBA wants teams in every region,in the main towns and even if you were to expand by another 6 franchises or more...you still have other factors.

Teams like the Lakers,Celtics,Knicks,and a few others have quite a bit of history. You can't really counter that, but ...picture Bill Gates buys a team for Honolulu. Betcha he can put something together.

Probably,as the punative aspects of the Lux Tax take effect...teams will find it hard to assemble a Super Team. Keep in mind....however..that Miami mostly was about 3 star players making a choice.
They could have as easily united elsewhere.

Chris Boussard said Bosh would not come to Cleveland.

LeBron James wants to stay in Cleveland and he wants Chris Bosh to join him.  That, according to ESPN's Chris Broussard, who made the assertion this morning on ESPNRadio's Mike and Mike in the Morning program.  According to Broussard, part of the reason there has been a delay in LeBron's announcement is he is trying to convince Bish to come to Cleveland with him.  That could only happen, of course, if the Toronto Raptors worked out a sign-and-trade for Bosh with the Cavaliers.

Bosh had reportedly stated that, while he did want to play with James, it had to be in Chicago or Miami.  Bosh wants to grow is brand, and feels that can only happen in a bigger market.  Perhaps, but Bosh should look no further than LeBron himself to see that big cities are no longer necessary when it comes to global icon status.

. http://www.fearthesword.com/2010/7/6/1554543/broussard-lebron-wants-chris-bosh

So no. Because of Chris Bosh's inflated ego, the superfriends were only going to end up in Chicago or Miami. He seems more interested in being able to sell Chris Bosh cologne, or adult diapers than be known for his success on the court. Had LeBron and Wade said that they were willing to come to Toronto, if trades could be worked out, Chris would have said no, because of personal brand reasons.