NBA Will Discuss Buyout Reform With NBPA During Next CBA Talks

[RealGM Wiretap]

The league office plans to consider wrapping a conversation about the buyout market when the NBA and NBPA reconvene ahead of the 23-24 CBA talks.

Several small market teams have complained about how the buyout market benefits, in their viewpoint, big market teams. The reality is there have been 39 buyout players who have averaged at least two games and 10 minutes per NBA playoff round and twenty were signed into top-15 markets, while 19 joined the rest.

Adam Silver's office doesn't see so much of an issue of fairness between big and small markets, but perhaps more a process that it is contradictory to the financial system's goals.

The NBA does want to find a way to make the buyout pool players available to more teams than only the contenders, sources tell ESPN, but that's hard to do without significant changes to the process.

The union will side on the freedom of movement for players unless they receive something of significance back.

Via Adrian Wojnarowski/ESPN

[njknicks]

We get that the NBA's' success is around big stars / big markets.

However, if the competition is watered down and other teams are not able to compete you will see decline in the overall quality of the NBA product ( which does not bode well for the future of the league if only a few teams can win titles ).

A couple of considerations the NBA should think about -- just some ideas to ensure parity in the league :

* Buyout players should not be eligible for the playoffs ( or be eligible to re-sign with those playoff bound teams )

* Players signing with teams after buyouts can only sign for difference between buyout / actual contract ( not more - essentially resign with their current year's contract value -- otherwise you incentivize players to leave )

* Have a tiered buyout range for contracts (i.e. rookie scale / veteran / all-star / max player )

* For teams with top 8 records = double tax for buyout contract ( for teams outside of that, no tax implication )

[MINDKCUF]

i have been calling for buyout reform for few years now.
its simple to reform = no team over salary cap can sign a buyout player.

done deal.

[ace198]

I’d implement the system they had when they had the amnesty. Teams under the cap can bid and get the player regardless if the player wants to come. The problem with that would be that there is only one team under the cap. Not sure what you could do in this situation. Maybe not tank on purpose and have competent front offices.

[tigerae]

i have been calling for buyout reform for few years now.
its simple to reform = no team over salary cap can sign a buyout player.

done deal.

So one team this season can sign buyout players based on your theory? That makes no sense and as the article stated, players who are bought out tend to go to competitors. This includes the Cavs and the Bucks in recent years who are small market teams. You want to have a chance at bought out players, then stay competitive. Also, don't buy out players if you're a small market team. Trade him or play him.

Also, how do you force a player to play for your team, especially if you bid the minimum for him. You want him to play for your small market lottery team, then you would likely need to overpay him anyway. And why would you hurt your lottery chances to draft an impactful player?

Not to mention, most players bought out tend to be on their way out of the league anyway and only stick for a year or two on a roster. Very rarely do you see a player who was bought out actually still have quality minutes on a roster in a couple of seasons, if at all.

[ace198]

i have been calling for buyout reform for few years now.
its simple to reform = no team over salary cap can sign a buyout player.

done deal.

So one team this season can sign buyout players based on your theory? That makes no sense and as the article stated, players who are bought out tend to go to competitors. This includes the Cavs and the Bucks in recent years who are small market teams. You want to have a chance at bought out players, then stay competitive. Also, don't buy out players if you're a small market team. Trade him or play him.

Not to mention, most players bought out tend to be on their way out of the league anyway and only stick for a year or two on a roster. Very rarely do you see a player who was bought out actually still have quality minutes on a roster in a couple of seasons, if at all.

Teams might lose out on players if they don’t agree to a buyout. Agents can easily not have their clients sign with those teams. The system needs reform though.

[tigerae]

i have been calling for buyout reform for few years now.
its simple to reform = no team over salary cap can sign a buyout player.

done deal.

So one team this season can sign buyout players based on your theory? That makes no sense and as the article stated, players who are bought out tend to go to competitors. This includes the Cavs and the Bucks in recent years who are small market teams. You want to have a chance at bought out players, then stay competitive. Also, don't buy out players if you're a small market team. Trade him or play him.

Not to mention, most players bought out tend to be on their way out of the league anyway and only stick for a year or two on a roster. Very rarely do you see a player who was bought out actually still have quality minutes on a roster in a couple of seasons, if at all.

Teams might lose out on players who they don’t agree to a buyout. Agents can easily not have their clients sign with those teams. The system needs reform though.

Buyouts are a two way street. If they were to reform the buyout process to not allow players to become free agents and go to a team they want, less players would even want buyouts. They would sit there happily collecting their bloated paychecks until they become free agents instead of agreeing to a buyout for less than their guaranteed money to then go play for a crappier team.

The only thing I could see the NBPA aggreeing to is if these small market teams were to guarantee the buyout players larger contracts than they left on the table along with guaranteed starting spot/playing time. So if they agreeing to take 10 million less in the buyout then they need to pay them 150% of that, so 15 million a year and then at least 30 mpg if they are healthy, for example.

[niha17]

Buyouts only happen when your teams sucks and you have stupid high contacts Get better as a team and you wont worry about buying out a player youll be looking to the playoffs It has nothing to do with market size its all about wins and loses

[DoItALL9]

All this discussion and no one has brought up what to offer the NBA players association

SMH

Sent from my LM-G710 using RealGM mobile app

[the_process]

i have been calling for buyout reform for few years now.
its simple to reform = no team over salary cap can sign a buyout player.

done deal.

Agreed, that's an easy fix and should be implemented.

[TheCage4]

The NBPA should have no reason to bend on this. Their players are getting most of their salary and then going to a team that can potentially win-it-all. Why would they negotiate something worse?

[Rashidi]

All this discussion and no one has brought up what to offer the NBA players association

SMH

Would you care to start us off? You're in the RealGM forums, not the offices of Rich Paul.

[tecumseh18]

Why not treat buy-outs like putting players on waivers? Bought out players should have to pass through a form of waivers - whereby lower ranked teams have first crack at the player - before they are complete free agents. Except that instead of requiring the team acquiring the player to pick up the full salary, they only have to pay the minimum.

Maybe add an additional rule requiring the new team to give the bought out player 15 minutes per game, or they go back through the waiver process.

[anatomicbomb]

So one team this season can sign buyout players based on your theory? That makes no sense and as the article stated, players who are bought out tend to go to competitors. This includes the Cavs and the Bucks in recent years who are small market teams. You want to have a chance at bought out players, then stay competitive. Also, don't buy out players if you're a small market team. Trade him or play him.

Not to mention, most players bought out tend to be on their way out of the league anyway and only stick for a year or two on a roster. Very rarely do you see a player who was bought out actually still have quality minutes on a roster in a couple of seasons, if at all.

Teams might lose out on players who they don’t agree to a buyout. Agents can easily not have their clients sign with those teams. The system needs reform though.

Buyouts are a two way street. If they were to reform the buyout process to not allow players to become free agents and go to a team they want, less players would even want buyouts. They would sit there happily collecting their bloated paychecks until they become free agents instead of agreeing to a buyout for less than their guaranteed money to then go play for a crappier team.

The only thing I could see the NBPA aggreeing to is if these small market teams were to guarantee the buyout players larger contracts than they left on the table along with guaranteed starting spot/playing time. So if they agreeing to take 10 million less in the buyout then they need to pay them 150% of that, so 15 million a year and then at least 30 mpg if they are healthy, for example.

Maybe something could be done where buyout signings are exceptions to the cap, and the size of the exception is directly inverse to market share. The main concern I can think of with this proposal is that typically small-market teams that achieve some sustained success or draft a superstar may be slightly penalized relative to other franchises that would generate similar viewership and merchandising with team/player success being equal. Make the minimum salary the same as currently and no player will necessarily be in jeopardy of making less, however they may find themselves in a position where there is a small trade-off between salary and championship likelihood - if this is an issue, maybe the NBPA can provision a small pool of funds each year that offsets these differences to the players.

I'd also like to point out that the math doesn't seem that distressing to me:

39 buyouts.

20 (51.3%) to top-15 (50%) of markets.
19 (48.7%) to bottom-15 (50%) of markets.

That is not a significant difference by any stretch, so it doesn't seem like the buyout process is really an issue in reality, just in perception. In reality, it seems like the choice is largely personal and any broader franchise-specific effects wash out over time as prevailing attitudes and franchise performances fluctuate.

[DoItALL9]

All this discussion and no one has brought up what to offer the NBA players association

SMH

Would you care to start us off? You're in the RealGM forums, not the offices of Rich Paul.

No, I don't want the current buyout procedure to change. It's much ado about nothing if you look at the facts. They don't contribute to changing the outcome of the championship historically.