NBA executives reportedly upset over Warriors signing Pachulia

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/...RI0?li=BBnbfcL

A lockout next summer is inevitable. It will include some knee-jerk stuff to try to prevent the formation of super teams.

One way would be to increase a player's FA cap hold if they meet certain standards like MVP, All-star selection, etc. This could take away all the Warriors' cap room next summer.

Same could have been said for West last year. I just don't see where you can legally or fairly draw the line.

:lol Why? He sucks anyway.

They will get over it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

A lockout next summer is inevitable. It will include some knee-jerk stuff to try to prevent the formation of super teams.

One way would be to increase a player's FA cap hold if they meet certain standards like MVP, All-star selection, etc. This could take away all the Warriors' cap room next summer.

---

The teams hate Lacob just enough to do that. However, I think the new CBA is going to make it easier to re-sign guys, not harder. The Warriors will be able to get keep their guys for sure, but I don't know if they'll keep the $15 Million or so they have in cap space.

And yeah, people need to shut the hell up and game-plan to beat them. This is exactly what the room exception is for.

LOL... they wouldn't be bitching if he had signed with their teams for that amount. It's exactly like the old joke:

Q. What's the definition of "slut"?
A. A girl who will sleep with anyone... except you.

The Warriors locked players up on contracts that are ridiculously low by today's standard. The cap exploded, and they could afford to sign another superstar. A bunch of other players now want to go to there to get a ring. That's EXACTLY the reason David West gave up $10M or whatever it was, to come to SA last season.

So, what, they're going to make up new rules to make it harder for teams with superstars to hire FA's? Or to make it harder for a superstar to go to a team that already has a superstar? I don't like it that the Warriors are so loaded, but I'm not ready to blow up the game over it. I remember when OKC was absolutely LOADED with young, cheap talent. Same with Portland during the Brandon Roy years. It's still a lot harder to win a championship than most people think. And it's pretty much impossible to keep a team like that together, because those cheap contracts expire and you can't afford to keep all of the players and still have a supporting cast.

I think the create of superteams is inevitable with the way things are going. The money going to the players is so large that at some point, they may not care if they can get $5,000,000 more from one team or another. They'll be looking at more money than they can spend. At some point, getting a ring is more important than increasing their net worth by $30,000,000. Especially if they're moving to a city that they actually want to live in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

The teams hate Lacob just enough to do that. However, I think the new CBA is going to make it easier to re-sign guys, not harder. The Warriors will be able to get keep their guys for sure, but I don't know if they'll keep the $15 Million or so they have in cap space.

---

Increasing cap holds shouldn't affect a team's ability to keep their own players, just their ability to also carve out cap space. Heck, the Spurs took advantage of this themselves with Kawhi's cap hold.


On a side note, I wonder if the league will address the after-tax inequality in salaries due to state income taxes. The league could offer to pay states a percentage of BRI that roughly equals (or slightly exceeds, to get them to agree) the states' current tax take in exchange for them not taxing NBA players' income. Until I had seen that Durant could get $129M after tax with the Spurs or Heat but only $109M with the Warriors, I hadn't realized that the difference was that big.

:wakeup

Remove max contacts and there will be no super teams.

Another way would be to introduce a points system like fantasy basketball almost where players are given ratings based on previous years stats/draft position. Remove the salary cap and use the points system.

Btw - The Australian NBL used a similar points system so there is a model out there. Although the NBL has not really done very well in recent years, for a number of reasons.

The faggot who tried to injure Kwa with an armbar?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

Increasing cap holds shouldn't affect a team's ability to keep their own players, just their ability to also carve out cap space. Heck, the Spurs took advantage of this themselves with Kawhi's cap hold.


On a side note, I wonder if the league will address the after-tax inequality in salaries due to state income taxes. The league could offer to pay states a percentage of BRI that roughly equals (or slightly exceeds, to get them to agree) the states' current tax take in exchange for them not taxing NBA players' income. Until I had seen that Durant could get $129M after tax with the Spurs or Heat but only $109M with the Warriors, I hadn't realized that the difference was that big.

---

The difference isn't quite that big, as the tax laws are complicated, but it's there. I don't think that's won any free agent, though, so I don't think it will be addressed by the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

A lockout next summer is inevitable. It will include some knee-jerk stuff to try to prevent the formation of super teams.

One way would be to increase a player's FA cap hold if they meet certain standards like MVP, All-star selection, etc. This could take away all the Warriors' cap room next summer.

---

Hmm okay so it's summer 2017 when the lockout is expected...was thinking it was gonna be later.

Spurs should be the favorites for that '18 title judging from history.
I mean you can substitute the word contenders but they've inarguably been that for every year since 2011, tbh.

then the owners need to get together and put a bounty on the Warriors. For 82 games every team plays like they are the Bad Boy Pistons. Hard Fouls, cheap shots, undercutting shots, stepping on Durant's Jones fracture, etc. and by the end, they will be so beat up and afraid to play basketball that they will crumple in the first round.

No one was saying this when West signed for the vet min with us last season.

Super teams make the league interesting. It will suck when the Spurs are no longer worthy of attracting people to be on the "super team."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -21-

:lol Why? He sucks anyway.

---

I just don't know why a role player like Pachulia gives a sh** about a ring over all those millions. Talk about delusional. I can understand why all stars need that ring for their egoes. But nobody gives a sh** what role players have rings and what don't with the possible exception of Big Shot Rob.

only legitimate claim would be the business argument of a watered down product.

just remove the max salary and that will result in a more even distribution of superstars.

Of course, that will lead us back into NBA execs giving put really bad contracts,

There would be more super teams if there were less teams. The NBA does this to themselves by watering down the product.

Instituting a Franchise Tag similar to the NFL with a bump over the salary max and heavy tax penalties could give the framework for a system.

Are people really comparing role player west to One of the greatest offensive scorers of all time in his prime joining a defending finals team with the MVP repeater right after that offensive scorer had won the MVP himself? :lol

What a ridiculous argument. This is what happens when people think they have an argument before actually thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UZER

There would be more super teams if there were less teams. The NBA does this to themselves by watering down the product.

---

NBA = billionaire owners club. It's a business, about money, not the game.

Make a FA draft where a FA contract can be matched by a team that ended the season below the offering team. If many teams Match the offer then the player goes to the lowest ranked team.
That way you entice early extensions and punish players for accepting below market deals in Free agency

The NBA might as well just cut down the number of teams to just the Western Conference. They are the only teams that are ever in contention. Don't get me wrong, Cavs won it this past one but not because the NBA wanted Cleveland to win but they wanted to see LeBron win it for Cleveland. When the narrative is shifted they will play the other side of the coin because money is what it is all about.

Just copy the NFL formula. Smart management has more impact there, there's parity and the product has certainly not suffered in popularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taking it to the Hole

The NBA might as well just cut down the number of teams to just the Western Conference. They are the only teams that are ever in contention. Don't get me wrong, Cavs won it this past one but not because the NBA wanted Cleveland to win but they wanted to see LeBron win it for Cleveland. When the narrative is shifted they will play the other side of the coin because money is what it is all about.

---

But Cavs won fair and square Warrefs could not make a shot even to save their lives, they lived by the 3 and died by an Irving 3.
People wanted Cavs to win because GS got too arrogant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dex

No one was saying this when West signed for the vet min with us last season.

---

True but we didn't just add the top All-Star in FA to our roster of the top All-Stars in the NBA. Parity in the NBA is a joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurs10

True but we didn't just add the top All-Star in FA to our roster of the top All-Stars in the NBA. Parity in the NBA is a joke.

---

Close enough. We added the top All-Star in FA (:lma) to a team that was only a year removed from the title and with the reigning DPOY (:claw). David West was ring chasing here just as much as he is ring chasing in GSW...the difference is he didn't give up $11M this time.

Smart move on West's part, tbh. Whether you like the Warriors or not, you have to acknowledge the stellar job that organization has done...if he really wants to ring, going there is technically the safer bet, whether we like it or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hsxvvd

Remove max contacts and there will be no super teams.

Another way would be to introduce a points system like fantasy basketball almost where players are given ratings based on previous years stats/draft position. Remove the salary cap and use the points system.

Btw - The Australian NBL used a similar points system so there is a model out there. Although the NBL has not really done very well in recent years, for a number of reasons.

---

Removing Max contracts solves this easily, imo

The NBA just had it's most popular season in 20 years, they aren't going to change anything:lol

Their ratings are sky-high, and they are probably on the verge of continuing a Cavs-Warriors Finals rivalry that has drawn the attention of more fans than anything NBA-related since Jordan's Bulls..

The way the NBA is headed the NBA can't afford a lockout....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

The NBA just had it's most popular season in 20 years, they aren't going to change anything:lol

Their ratings are sky-high, and they are probably on the verge of continuing a Cavs-Warriors Finals rivalry that has drawn the attention of more fans than anything NBA-related since Jordan's Bulls..

---

selling there souls I know.....:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurtech09

selling there souls I know.....:(

---

And making insane dollars for everyone involved along the way.
nice racket they got going on there...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

The NBA just had it's most popular season in 20 years, they aren't going to change anything:lol

Their ratings are sky-high, and they are probably on the verge of continuing a Cavs-Warriors Finals rivalry that has drawn the attention of more fans than anything NBA-related since Jordan's Bulls..

---

But the popularity (as for as the North American market goes) is somewhat "phony." And I think the NBA is being short-sighted here, banking more on star power and storylines instead of making the on-court product more compelling. If the NBA Finals don't feature the Lakers or a mega-star on the level of Lebron, ratings nose-dive.

See here. Look how ratings tanked following Jordan's retirement:

https://thecrossoverreport.files.wor...ba-ratings.jpg

I've always joked that casual NBA fans don't tune into watch basketball, they tune into to watch Lebron or Curry (I think Curry's marketability is overrated). The NFL and MLB were smart to market around teams rather than stars. The last Game 7 we had in the World Series drew 23 million viewers, between the MLB versions of the Spurs (SF Giants) and Indiana Packers (KC Royals). If the Spurs and Pacers met in an NBA Finals, it would be lucky to draw 13-15 million for a Game 7. And we know the NFL draws regardless of team.

The reason this strategy is risky (marketing around stars) is because marketability and "presence" can't be taught. So there's no guarantee a player will fill Lebron's void once he retires. It took over a decade for Jordan's shoes to be about half-way filled (Lebron really didn't become a marketing phenomenon until about '09ish. The '07 Finals were projected to get good ratings based on his presence alone, and it wound up being the lowest rated ever). Kobe was kind of cheap imitation. Lakers drew solid, but nothing eye-opening.

I find this disheartening, because it seems the majority of NBA fans don't really care about the game. They just care about stars and storylines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

The NBA just had it's most popular season in 20 years, they aren't going to change anything:lol

Their ratings are sky-high, and they are probably on the verge of continuing a Cavs-Warriors Finals rivalry that has drawn the attention of more fans than anything NBA-related since Jordan's Bulls..

---

You could have said the exact same thing about the short Lakers/Celtics rivalry in 2008-2010. That fell apart and the league managed to recover.

Lower the cap or increase the max

Hard cap it and don't allow teams to go over that cap to retain their own players.. Let them make the decision on who they're going to keep and who they are going to pay..

I will agree that their ratings are higher than ever but also the amount of blacklash they have received over officiating and late game calls is at it's highest as well. They may be able to keep business as usual but a lot of fans are starting to get a mindset that the whole league is rigged. That could turn away a lot of fans away from the NBA this next season in addition to this era of superteam building.

Ray Allen just joined GS as well.

NBA Finals game 7 audience tops 30 million, biggest in 18 years

2015, less than 2016 was also highest since 1998

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

LOL... they wouldn't be bitching if he had signed with their teams for that amount. It's exactly like the old joke:

Q. What's the definition of "slut"?
A. A girl who will sleep with anyone... except you.

The Warriors locked players up on contracts that are ridiculously low by today's standard. The cap exploded, and they could afford to sign another superstar. A bunch of other players now want to go to there to get a ring. That's EXACTLY the reason David West gave up $10M or whatever it was, to come to SA last season.

So, what, they're going to make up new rules to make it harder for teams with superstars to hire FA's? Or to make it harder for a superstar to go to a team that already has a superstar? I don't like it that the Warriors are so loaded, but I'm not ready to blow up the game over it. I remember when OKC was absolutely LOADED with young, cheap talent. Same with Portland during the Brandon Roy years. It's still a lot harder to win a championship than most people think. And it's pretty much impossible to keep a team like that together, because those cheap contracts expire and you can't afford to keep all of the players and still have a supporting cast.

---

this is where Presti shines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -21-

:lol Why? He sucks anyway.

---

and this is exactly how the NBA should handle cry baby small market shitty teams. The Warriors shoulda traded Bogut, Ezeli, and Barnes to Okc when the news broke about Durants interest in GS midseason. Now they're signing Pachulia and West to fill out the roster. Durant shoulda forced his hand in Okc more forcefully. karma plays the rich just as well as it does the poor. the poor don't need socialism, they need more pure capitalism. they need to remove the cap, all together. and they should make a single elimination lottery team playoff tournament for the #1 pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hsxvvd

Remove max contacts and there will be no super teams.

Another way would be to introduce a points system like fantasy basketball almost where players are given ratings based on previous years stats/draft position. Remove the salary cap and use the points system.

Btw - The Australian NBL used a similar points system so there is a model out there. Although the NBL has not really done very well in recent years, for a number of reasons.

---

Kinda would have helped more when we had a superstar who was drafted 57th overall...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

But the popularity (as for as the North American market goes) is somewhat "phony." And I think the NBA is being short-sighted here, banking more on star power and storylines instead of making the on-court product more compelling. If the NBA Finals don't feature the Lakers or a mega-star on the level of Lebron, ratings nose-dive.

See here. Look how ratings tanked following Jordan's retirement:

https://thecrossoverreport.files.wor...ba-ratings.jpg

I've always joked that casual NBA fans don't tune into watch basketball, they tune into to watch Lebron or Curry (I think Curry's marketability is overrated). The NFL and MLB were smart to market around teams rather than stars. The last Game 7 we had in the World Series drew 23 million viewers, between the MLB versions of the Spurs (SF Giants) and Indiana Packers (KC Royals). If the Spurs and Pacers met in an NBA Finals, it would be lucky to draw 13-15 million for a Game 7. And we know the NFL draws regardless of team.

The reason this strategy is risky (marketing around stars) is because marketability and "presence" can't be taught. So there's no guarantee a player will fill Lebron's void once he retires. It took over a decade for Jordan's shoes to be about half-way filled (Lebron really didn't become a marketing phenomenon until about '09ish. The '07 Finals were projected to get good ratings based on his presence alone, and it wound up being the lowest rated ever). Kobe was kind of cheap imitation. Lakers drew solid, but nothing eye-opening.

I find this disheartening, because it seems the majority of NBA fans don't really care about the game. They just care about stars and storylines.

---

So the NBA's heyday was in the 1990s with Jordan. Even with about 100 million more Americans in existence today than then... wow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuixafun

Ray Allen just joined GS as well.

---

ring chasing faggot, i hope he tears both acls

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNT Eagles 2016

So the NBA's heyday was in the 1990s with Jordan. Even with about 100 million more Americans in existence today than then... wow

---

Yeah. The NBA's popularity today in the US doesn't compare to the phenomenon it was at the height of the Jordan-era. The game has grown worldwide, though.