Salary cap tweek to get super teams back

This topic contains 20 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by circumlocution75 10 years, 5 months ago.

Author
Posts
Posted on: Sun, 12/27/2015 - 5:14pm #62306

antiwork3000
Participant

This would benefit teams like Warriors who have mulitple max contract guys on their team that they drafted. Why break that up? Thunder would have been a powerhouse by now if they would’ve been able to keep Harden.
It should benefit ownership by allowing it to build a powerhouse and all the profits that come with that.
Players get more money and can stay with one team/city for their whole lives.

0
Posted on: Sun, 12/27/2015 - 5:21pm #1034033

antiwork3000
Participant
My post was cut off somehow.. anyway I was proposing a 15 million max cap hit for drafted players. If you drafted said player you could re-sign him to any contract and would still only count max 15 million on your cap.
0
Posted on: Sun, 12/27/2015 - 5:21pm #1033898

antiwork3000
Participant
My post was cut off somehow.. anyway I was proposing a 15 million max cap hit for drafted players. If you drafted said player you could re-sign him to any contract and would still only count max 15 million on your cap.
0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 8:21am #1034082

Sewok15
Participant
You can already go over the cap to resign your own players as long as you don’t mind paying the luxury tax. I wouldn’t be oppossed to your idea but I don’t think it would make all that much of a difference in the long run. The cap is going way up soon so if guys really want to win they will have to take slightly less money to team up with another superstar or two.
0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 8:21am #1033946

Sewok15
Participant
You can already go over the cap to resign your own players as long as you don’t mind paying the luxury tax. I wouldn’t be oppossed to your idea but I don’t think it would make all that much of a difference in the long run. The cap is going way up soon so if guys really want to win they will have to take slightly less money to team up with another superstar or two.
0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:45pm #1034315
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  Luxery tax would still be in play but we’d decrease the hit with home grown players. Where does the luxery tax money go today anway? Split evenly with the other 29 teams into those owners pockets? Why not just give it to the home grown players?
  0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:45pm #1034172
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  Luxery tax would still be in play but we’d decrease the hit with home grown players. Where does the luxery tax money go today anway? Split evenly with the other 29 teams into those owners pockets? Why not just give it to the home grown players?
  0
- Posted on: Thu, 12/31/2015 - 2:44pm #1034763
  
  circumlocution75
  Participant
  James Harden….. I remember when all the Talking Heads on major Sports Broadcasting companies leaked that OKC was Not going to re-sign both Harden & Ibaka…… Everyone debated who they should keep…. But not many analysts discussed if keeping Both would be worth it b/c the chance of building a "Super Team" would generate so much extra revenue that it would Off-set the Luxury Tax cap hit…..
  Sewok15 pointed out that the Og team of Max players already have an advantage b/c they can pay more than competitors….. & I like this feature b/c it rewards due diligence in the Draft….. but it still allows player movement….
  Most experts believed Harden was the better choice b/c "7 footers w/ that kind of Defensive ability are so rare…" & I agree – if Ibaka was healthy in 2014, I’m not sure San Antone beats them in the Western Conference Finals…. but I also believe OKC was Crazy to let Harden walk they should have signed both….. Why do you buy an NBA Fanchise???
  OKC found themself in a unique position & I think it’s absolutely crazy that they did not take the risk & sign Harden – a guy who absolutely torched the Great San Antonio Spurs in the Western Conference Finals the year OKC lost to the Heat & Lebron……
  As far as "Super Teams" – I think expansion did more to break down the ability to build "Super Teams" more than the Salary Cap….
  
  0
- Posted on: Thu, 12/31/2015 - 2:44pm #1034625
  
  circumlocution75
  Participant
  James Harden….. I remember when all the Talking Heads on major Sports Broadcasting companies leaked that OKC was Not going to re-sign both Harden & Ibaka…… Everyone debated who they should keep…. But not many analysts discussed if keeping Both would be worth it b/c the chance of building a "Super Team" would generate so much extra revenue that it would Off-set the Luxury Tax cap hit…..
  Sewok15 pointed out that the Og team of Max players already have an advantage b/c they can pay more than competitors….. & I like this feature b/c it rewards due diligence in the Draft….. but it still allows player movement….
  Most experts believed Harden was the better choice b/c "7 footers w/ that kind of Defensive ability are so rare…" & I agree – if Ibaka was healthy in 2014, I’m not sure San Antone beats them in the Western Conference Finals…. but I also believe OKC was Crazy to let Harden walk they should have signed both….. Why do you buy an NBA Fanchise???
  OKC found themself in a unique position & I think it’s absolutely crazy that they did not take the risk & sign Harden – a guy who absolutely torched the Great San Antonio Spurs in the Western Conference Finals the year OKC lost to the Heat & Lebron……
  As far as "Super Teams" – I think expansion did more to break down the ability to build "Super Teams" more than the Salary Cap….
  
  0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 9:54am #1034091

Memphis Madness
Participant
That’s not a bad idea. Reward teams for drafting well.
What about if you MATCH another team’s MAX offer on one of your own guys you have to send a 2nd round pick to the other team?
Teams used to get compensation back on things like this. Might not be a bad idea, IF you try to give a MAX contract to your fourth guy.
Of course, you need a BIG THREE now, so if you wanna sign your FOURTH guy to big money, then you can do it IF you drafted the guy and IF you give up a 2nd round pick as compensation. You might ALSO need to give $500,000 to the team who signed the guy first (then you match) in order to increase the compensation, and that half a million would NOT count against the salary cap or luxury tax.
So, a team like the Warriors could give MAX DEALS to Steph, Klay, and Draymond. No problem. BUT, if they wanted to ALSO pay big money to Harrison Barnes and probably Festus Ezeli, too, then they would have to pay a penalty, BUT teams should be REWARDED for drafting well, and building GREAT TEAMS. So, if another team gives a BIG offer sheet to Harrison Barnes, and the Warriors match, then the Warriors owe that team a 2nd round pick and $500,000 cash. Same with Festus Ezeli. The Warriors will be allowed to do it (have more money to sign their OWN guys and guys that they ALSO drafted), but will ALSO have to give up a 2nd round pick and $500,000 cash to the team that gives him a big offer sheet.
So, if the Warriors wanted to pay their Big Three AND Barnes and Ezeli then they would be out two 2nd round picks and $1 million cash. I think that would be fair for everyone involved.
If a team wants to go ALL IN for a title and sign their OWN guy to what would be the team’s FOURTH Max Contract, but someone they didn’t draft and a guy they recently traded for, then you can up those penalties to TWO 2nd round picks and $1.5 million cash as compensation to the team that offers the highest offer sheet to your free agent.
If you go get a FOURTH max guy from ANOTHER team then give the former team the TWO second round picks plus $1.75 million cash. OR, THREE 2nd round picks and $1.5 million cash.
There should be some price to pay for signing a FOURTH Max Contract guy. There would be FEWER penalties for signing your OWN guy that you drafted, and MORE for a guy you DIDN’T draft, and THE MOST for a 4th Max guy who IS NOT currently on your roster… in that case you would have to give up the MOST compensation.
You could also do a similar deal for another team who signs away your guy who free agent who ends up getting a MAX CONTRACT. IF that will be the ONLY max contract on the other team’s roster, then you owe the former team a 2nd round pick and $250,000 cash, Or two 2nd round picks with NO CASH. If the former team doesn’t need the picks, then you owe them $500,000 cash.

0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 9:54am #1033954

Memphis Madness
Participant
That’s not a bad idea. Reward teams for drafting well.
What about if you MATCH another team’s MAX offer on one of your own guys you have to send a 2nd round pick to the other team?
Teams used to get compensation back on things like this. Might not be a bad idea, IF you try to give a MAX contract to your fourth guy.
Of course, you need a BIG THREE now, so if you wanna sign your FOURTH guy to big money, then you can do it IF you drafted the guy and IF you give up a 2nd round pick as compensation. You might ALSO need to give $500,000 to the team who signed the guy first (then you match) in order to increase the compensation, and that half a million would NOT count against the salary cap or luxury tax.
So, a team like the Warriors could give MAX DEALS to Steph, Klay, and Draymond. No problem. BUT, if they wanted to ALSO pay big money to Harrison Barnes and probably Festus Ezeli, too, then they would have to pay a penalty, BUT teams should be REWARDED for drafting well, and building GREAT TEAMS. So, if another team gives a BIG offer sheet to Harrison Barnes, and the Warriors match, then the Warriors owe that team a 2nd round pick and $500,000 cash. Same with Festus Ezeli. The Warriors will be allowed to do it (have more money to sign their OWN guys and guys that they ALSO drafted), but will ALSO have to give up a 2nd round pick and $500,000 cash to the team that gives him a big offer sheet.
So, if the Warriors wanted to pay their Big Three AND Barnes and Ezeli then they would be out two 2nd round picks and $1 million cash. I think that would be fair for everyone involved.
If a team wants to go ALL IN for a title and sign their OWN guy to what would be the team’s FOURTH Max Contract, but someone they didn’t draft and a guy they recently traded for, then you can up those penalties to TWO 2nd round picks and $1.5 million cash as compensation to the team that offers the highest offer sheet to your free agent.
If you go get a FOURTH max guy from ANOTHER team then give the former team the TWO second round picks plus $1.75 million cash. OR, THREE 2nd round picks and $1.5 million cash.
There should be some price to pay for signing a FOURTH Max Contract guy. There would be FEWER penalties for signing your OWN guy that you drafted, and MORE for a guy you DIDN’T draft, and THE MOST for a 4th Max guy who IS NOT currently on your roster… in that case you would have to give up the MOST compensation.
You could also do a similar deal for another team who signs away your guy who free agent who ends up getting a MAX CONTRACT. IF that will be the ONLY max contract on the other team’s roster, then you owe the former team a 2nd round pick and $250,000 cash, Or two 2nd round picks with NO CASH. If the former team doesn’t need the picks, then you owe them $500,000 cash.

0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:52pm #1034317
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  Exactly, reward teams for drafting well. When players know this is their team/their city they can do a lot for the city as far as giving back to the community through business or other reinvestment. Even more than what they’re doing today. It should be a win for all, players, ownership, fans, local communities.
  0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:52pm #1034174
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  Exactly, reward teams for drafting well. When players know this is their team/their city they can do a lot for the city as far as giving back to the community through business or other reinvestment. Even more than what they’re doing today. It should be a win for all, players, ownership, fans, local communities.
  0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 11:15am #1034101

Memphis Madness
Participant
I am a Grizzlies fan so I understand small market teams. But, I ALSO like great, dynasty-type teams like the Golden State Warriors. I will also admit that it is better for the league if at least one or two of these BIG MARKET Blue Chip Teams are contenders: Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, and Bulls.
You can’t punish the small market teams, but it doesn’t really make sense to punish the BIG MARKET TEAMS or the dynasty-in-the-making teams either.
If the Warriors lose, I want it to be because an EVEN BETTER team took them down. I don’t want the salary cap to beat them.
Hopefully, the Warriors return the same core/rotation next year by resigning Barnes and Ezeli. A couple of vets on big contracts (Iggy and Bogut) come off the books in 2017, so the Warriors might only have a ‘UUUUGE payroll for one more year. Then again, Steph’s next contract is gonna be REALLY ‘uuuge…
I wouldn’t worry TOO MUCH about things since most of the top teams are small market franchises: basically, the top 4 are, if you only count Oakland and not the surrounding Bay Area/San Francisco: Golden State Warriors, San Antonio Spurs, Cleveland Cavs, and the Oklahoma City Thunder. You would also have to put the Indiana Pacers in there somewhere, with the Memphis Grizzlies also (barely) hanging on. The Detroit Pistons have gone through a successful semi-reload and are another small market team who SHOULD make the playoffs. Well, either them or a team like the small market Charlotte Hornets…
The West is the best conference, at least at the top, but the small market Jazz, Nuggets, Kings, and Blazers are still fighting for at least one playoff spot.
I don’t think the League wins when a small market team like the Thunder has to trade James Harden.
So, if a team, even a big market franchise, wants to get a super team — let ’em. But, make them pay for it. They can get FOUR or even FIVE MAX CONTRACTS if they give up compensation to other teams (cash and draft picks) AS WELL AS having to pay some luxury tax.

0
Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 11:15am #1033964

Memphis Madness
Participant
I am a Grizzlies fan so I understand small market teams. But, I ALSO like great, dynasty-type teams like the Golden State Warriors. I will also admit that it is better for the league if at least one or two of these BIG MARKET Blue Chip Teams are contenders: Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, and Bulls.
You can’t punish the small market teams, but it doesn’t really make sense to punish the BIG MARKET TEAMS or the dynasty-in-the-making teams either.
If the Warriors lose, I want it to be because an EVEN BETTER team took them down. I don’t want the salary cap to beat them.
Hopefully, the Warriors return the same core/rotation next year by resigning Barnes and Ezeli. A couple of vets on big contracts (Iggy and Bogut) come off the books in 2017, so the Warriors might only have a ‘UUUUGE payroll for one more year. Then again, Steph’s next contract is gonna be REALLY ‘uuuge…
I wouldn’t worry TOO MUCH about things since most of the top teams are small market franchises: basically, the top 4 are, if you only count Oakland and not the surrounding Bay Area/San Francisco: Golden State Warriors, San Antonio Spurs, Cleveland Cavs, and the Oklahoma City Thunder. You would also have to put the Indiana Pacers in there somewhere, with the Memphis Grizzlies also (barely) hanging on. The Detroit Pistons have gone through a successful semi-reload and are another small market team who SHOULD make the playoffs. Well, either them or a team like the small market Charlotte Hornets…
The West is the best conference, at least at the top, but the small market Jazz, Nuggets, Kings, and Blazers are still fighting for at least one playoff spot.
I don’t think the League wins when a small market team like the Thunder has to trade James Harden.
So, if a team, even a big market franchise, wants to get a super team — let ’em. But, make them pay for it. They can get FOUR or even FIVE MAX CONTRACTS if they give up compensation to other teams (cash and draft picks) AS WELL AS having to pay some luxury tax.

0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:59pm #1034319
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  The only thing I will say about this is regardless big or small city you cannot deny great basketball. People will log in to watch great basketball period. Imagine if the Grizz were able to keep the Gasol/Zbo/Gay/Conley unit in tact. Warriors/Griz today would be a crazy chess match.
  I’m not sure if at their height if Gay/Conley were max guys anyway (maybe they weren’t because of the cap?) but 3 of those guys were home grown and would have been better if they were able to stay together.
  0
- Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 3:59pm #1034176
  
  antiwork3000
  Participant
  The only thing I will say about this is regardless big or small city you cannot deny great basketball. People will log in to watch great basketball period. Imagine if the Grizz were able to keep the Gasol/Zbo/Gay/Conley unit in tact. Warriors/Griz today would be a crazy chess match.
  I’m not sure if at their height if Gay/Conley were max guys anyway (maybe they weren’t because of the cap?) but 3 of those guys were home grown and would have been better if they were able to stay together.
  0
  - Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 9:10pm #1034363
    
    YungmUNy
    Participant
    Gay was a liability for the Grizzlies, just like he was with the Raptors and is proving to be with the Kings. Especially in Memphis, Gay was a ball stopper, but on offense instead of defense. Once the ball touched his hands, it never left his hands, the offense stagnated, and Gay would often wind up playing hero ball.
    I’d take Tony Allen from that era over Rudy Gay 9 times out of 10. He was the spark that ignited that Grit-N-Grind Grizzlies style. He was the guy who would take the opposing team’s best player completely out of the game, motivate the rest of the team and the fans to get into the game, and just generally bring the heart into a professional game that you usually see more often on the collegiate level. These last few years, he’s been invaluable for the Grizzlies, and frankly, is underpaid and a bargain considering other contracts around the league.
    The Grizzlies had a great thing going on there for a while, and they may regain the momentum, but if you think about it, they were only a horrible Z-Bo disqualification against the Thunder (and I mean a Sacramento Kings-LA Lakers, Game 6 level horrible disqualification) away from being in the NBA Finals in 2014. Last season, the Conley playoff injury set them back, but they still finished the season with Cleveland as the only team to beat the Warriors three times.
    Now, this season is another story, and there are reasons why they are struggling that deserve their own discussion, but I don’t think keeping Gay would have helped them. In fact, it would have had the opposite effect. He was addition by subtraction.
    
    0
  - Posted on: Mon, 12/28/2015 - 9:10pm #1034220
    
    YungmUNy
    Participant
    Gay was a liability for the Grizzlies, just like he was with the Raptors and is proving to be with the Kings. Especially in Memphis, Gay was a ball stopper, but on offense instead of defense. Once the ball touched his hands, it never left his hands, the offense stagnated, and Gay would often wind up playing hero ball.
    I’d take Tony Allen from that era over Rudy Gay 9 times out of 10. He was the spark that ignited that Grit-N-Grind Grizzlies style. He was the guy who would take the opposing team’s best player completely out of the game, motivate the rest of the team and the fans to get into the game, and just generally bring the heart into a professional game that you usually see more often on the collegiate level. These last few years, he’s been invaluable for the Grizzlies, and frankly, is underpaid and a bargain considering other contracts around the league.
    The Grizzlies had a great thing going on there for a while, and they may regain the momentum, but if you think about it, they were only a horrible Z-Bo disqualification against the Thunder (and I mean a Sacramento Kings-LA Lakers, Game 6 level horrible disqualification) away from being in the NBA Finals in 2014. Last season, the Conley playoff injury set them back, but they still finished the season with Cleveland as the only team to beat the Warriors three times.
    Now, this season is another story, and there are reasons why they are struggling that deserve their own discussion, but I don’t think keeping Gay would have helped them. In fact, it would have had the opposite effect. He was addition by subtraction.
    
    0
Posted on: Tue, 12/29/2015 - 8:21am #1034293

Matos
Participant
Everyone thinks Thunder would be unstoppable with Harden still there but one of two things would happen:
1) He would not get as many touches and his production ceiling (not talent ceiling) would be where it was before he left
2) He would blossom talent wise and one of the other two would decrease in production.

Harden can’t play well (meaning elite level) with other players who need the ball in their hands. Thunder have two of those.

0
Posted on: Tue, 12/29/2015 - 8:21am #1034435

Matos
Participant
Everyone thinks Thunder would be unstoppable with Harden still there but one of two things would happen:
1) He would not get as many touches and his production ceiling (not talent ceiling) would be where it was before he left
2) He would blossom talent wise and one of the other two would decrease in production.

Harden can’t play well (meaning elite level) with other players who need the ball in their hands. Thunder have two of those.

0
Author
Posts

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.