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.
Why? He sucks anyway.
They will get over it...
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 up and game-plan to beat them. This is exactly what the room exception is for.
LOL... they wouldn't be ing if he had signed with their teams for that amount. It's exactly like the old joke:
Q. What's the definition of " "?
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.
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.
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 got who tried to injure Kwa with an armbar?
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.
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 le judging from history.
I mean you can subs ute 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."
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.
Ins uting 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?
What a ridiculous argument. This is what happens when people think they have an argument before actually thinking.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
