share

Franchise players idea...

Russell0Westbrook
Russell0Westbrook's picture
Registered User
Joined: 10/11/2009
Posts: 686
Points: 346
Offline
Franchise players idea...

I have a great idea that could help all the teams in the NBA. I think they should adopt the rule that the NFL uses and all the players hate. The NBA should allow every team to use the franchise tag on 1 player every year. They should use the same rules the NFL uses with its tag. The players may not like it but it would be good for the fans who see players develope then leave their team. What do you guys think?


tli232
Registered User
Joined: 04/11/2009
Posts: 602
Points: 591
Offline
Frames of reference

In the NFL, every team has 35 Legit NFL players. The marginal impact of the franchise tag on a certain team is much lower than a hypothetical franchise tag on an NBA team where only 8 players compose the body of the team. I just think the impact on the league is huge as this would imply that most stars stay with their respective teams after their rookie contract. If one thinks holistically about the whole process, this would limit talent turnover in the NBA. This would put much emphasis on draft-night success in order to become any good in the league.

Think about it. Players in situations like Chris Bosh, LeBron James, D-Wade and others wouldn't exist in the NBA anymore. That means superstars are pretty much superstars on their team for life unless they're traded. I understand the excitement in that for some people, as we're going back to the Celtics dynasties or whatnot. However, how would you feel if you were a Knicks Fan? This would mean that you're never going to be able to sign a star player. And I think that sucks.

Russell0Westbrook
Russell0Westbrook's picture
Registered User
Joined: 10/11/2009
Posts: 686
Points: 346
Offline
what i was saying is teams

what i was saying is teams in a smeller market would be able to keep their star player and if somebody wanted him they could trade for him. this woul keep every team in the league able to compete not just a handful that why its always open in th nfl because they have a way for teams to keep their star player also rarely does somebody get the franchise tag 2 years in a row because you have to increase the pay by 20%. as is its always between 4 or 5 teams that have a legit shot

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11960
Points: 11937
Offline
i agree with tli on this

i agree with tli on this one. The other thing to take into account is that in nfl, contracts are not gauranteed so the franchise tag paying a player for one season does not really hurt the long term money that player can make if he were hurt or his game suddenly declined. But in the nba, the stars who had a one year franchise tag would get paid great one year at a time, but if they ever got hurt or their game declined, they would be screwed out of that long term deal. So basically, every good player not given the franchise tag would get the better long term deal and have financial security that the superstars would be denied.

the lake show
Registered User
Joined: 01/13/2010
Posts: 8202
Points: 1200
Offline
well there wouldnt be a tag

well there wouldnt be a tag 2 years in a row because contacts are long then one year. and what happenes to guys who end up with a horrble franchise like the clippers. never getting close to a title while in there prime and maybe no ever getting to the playoffs. im sure it would be percet for teams but not for players which is why im glad they have the players collective bargining thing

RSS: Syndicate content