I actually think the NBA will have no choice but to implement an NFL-esque system by the next CBA negotiations, tbh..... it's either that, or every small-market team either getting contracted or trying to crowd into NY, LA, or Miami, tbh....
We don't know yet. I doubt Buss will want to continue paying huge luxury payments without a championship. The new CBA allows you to go all in and just penalizes heavily for staying like that. So I imagine he's going to have a pretty quick hook if they're not getting results.
Yeah I never understand that. George Karl is always complaining about how good the Lakers are but still allows them to get better. He must think helping the Lakers get Howard is OK since he's getting Igoudala.
Orlando ends up with , and didn't get rid of any of their bad contracts. They could easily have waited until the trade deadline and gotten more for Howard from a team that just wanted to rent him for half a year to make a run at a le. No player's trade demand put a gun to the heads of Philly and Denver.
How does he become more valuable at the deadline? It is the same exact scenario. He is asking for a trade. He still will have a select group of teams who he would agree to play for.
I agree that the Magic could have gotten more for Howard. Even if they didn't bring talent back in they needed to atleast clear cap space. But the point that I would like to make is that they should not have to be subject to player trade demands. They had a horrible season they got the number one pick. They picked Howard and worked to develop him. Then he signs a contract saying he will play in Orlando for a giant amount of money. Then he demands to be traded. The Orlando Magic should not have to purposefully destroy their team to accommodate one player's demands. This is a formula that is going to leave teams in shambles to satisfy a few superstars.
Now Dwight Howard is happy but every Magic fan is screwed for the next few season while they try and sort out the mess. I think this idea of the teams being responsible to star players is ridiculous. They signed a contract saying that they will play basketball to the best of their ability for a franchise, and they only seem to honor it when it works perfectly in their favor. If they don't like the situation they demand to be traded or simply give up and collect the money anyway (I am looking at you Diaw). I can't pretend to have the answer but the league needs to develop a system that benefits the whole. First of all not having teams remain powerhouses indefinitely, but also having a firm understanding that players are there to better the team.
I understand that it is rough to just be told you have been traded and have to move across the country immediately. But that is just the price you pay to play in the NBA. Trust me the pros outweigh the cons on this one. You might argue that this is selfish on the team's behave, but in reality the team is moving a couple of players to benefit the entire roster and fan base. It is not an action that only satisfies one person's desires, which is exactly what these trade demands are. I was hoping they would fix this in the lockout but it looks like the same old system right now. Hopefully the new tax penalties do make a difference, but I am skeptical. I think the CBA needs an overhaul and the power needs to be taken out of the players hands.
OP, I don't agree that they should lose draft picks, but I agree that there needs to be a change made.
Luxury tax isn't enough. There simply needs to be restrictions put in place to prevent stuff like this year from happening.
For example, something like: Once a team is in the luxury tax, they can no longer add a player to the team that gets paid more than an MLE, even via trade of another high salary player. If they want to trade said high salary player, it can be for multiple players to match up salary, but no high salary players.
That way they can't jump dump their inferior center with knees that he's about to have surgeory on for the best player in the NBA. . .and that way they can just basically sign Steve Nash to a multi-year 12m/year deal when they're already WAY over the cap. Essentially destroying the entire point of there even being a salary cap (trade exception, terrible idea)
That's besides the point, because OKC/Seattle has been terrible for a decade before they became good again. . .because of said salary situation. Many other teams face the same issues.
And yes, I've seen the arguments of "the Knicks are terrible despite having money", but that's just one of the few exceptions to what's otherwise normality. Just like the Spurs are a very rare and unique team that somehow manages to be good all the time despite never being very far above the salary cap any given year.
No one complained about the Bulls because they didn't buy their les. They drafted Jordan, they drafted Pippen, they drafted Horace Grant, they drafted Kukoc, etc. They barely added much to that team through free agency at all. They also very rarely took part in any major trades; the only one I can even really think of is the one where the Spurs wanted to just get rid of Rodman because he was a head. Which I don't consider to be in the same ballpark as the infamous Lakers "cash considerations" type trade.
The Lakers are the Yankees of the NBA. They buy their championships. That's always going to be disliked by a significant portion of the population. Usually those that enjoy watching "fair compe ion".
Refusing to give him up for or requiring that a team take on a bad contract would be a good start, and would likely have teams sweetening the pot. Also, Howard didn't say there were teams he wouldn't play for, he said there were teams he would re-sign with. Again, a team might offer somehing during the season if he could bring them a le, even if he walks after doing so. Seriously, it was such a deal they could have simply waited around for a better offer, and the risk was very slight, even if they can't move him.
Everything else is the way professional sports has always been since the age of free agency.
I think saying you won't sign long term is essentially saying you don't want to play there. And you can debate that all day, but the fact is it has the same result. The result is that all those teams which he said he would not sign long term deals with are disincentivized to trade for him. That means his words have limited the number of teams who are willing to trade for him. He has handicapped the Magic from the start. The Magic had to make a deal which means other teams are not going to sweet the pot they are going to wait for the Magic to lower their asking price, knowing that the longer the wait the more desperate the Magic are to move him. They cut their losses early on this one to avoid an even worse deal. I am not saying they got a good deal but I see their logic.
Having a really hard time figuring out how the Magic avoided an even worse deal. What they got was worse than just letting his ass leave at the end of the season.
As much fun as I am having disagreeing with you I cannot refute that point. I think it was a terrible deal, but I think they had to make a deal and that is the problem. They should not have their arm twisted into making a bad deal. But at the same time what deal was out there where they truthfully get equal value for dwight howard. It is hard to construct one.
I really really wish for their sake that they'd made a deal that could be categorized as a "had to make" kind of deal. I can't blame the Magic for Shaq ending up in LA, but they can never complain about Howard being there. Perhaps they decided that they'd rather have him in the western conference, which I suppose could be a small victory, but given what they received I find it unlikely that they'll make it to the conference finals before Dwight retires.
I totally agree with that last statement. I will absolutely watch the Spurs and the NBA until Duncan retires, but after he is gone I can see myself just giving up on the NBA. I am really pushed away by the money grubbing, celebrity players; the fact that big market teams have distinct advantages; and the physicality being taken out of the game. I watched a do entary on the Pacers vs. the Knicks back when Jordan retired. Watching the clips of the game play back in 93 reminded me how much I miss that style of play. Now when a cutter goes down the lane a defender tries to slide under him and fall down to get the call. Back in the old days you went for the block and if you couldn't get it you put the offensive player on the ground. I miss that brand of basketball.
What's new? Just more money and business.
I think the current style of play relies on the refs too much. I was always of the belief no blood no foul. Basically if the foul wasn't significant you shouldn't call it.
Too often you see a guy step under someone that's in the air or that's already released the ball (sometimes both) and draw a "charge". David Robinson used to draw charges once in a while and it's because he had such amazingly quick feet. 90 percent of what's called today is a simple blocking foul. If the NBA ins uted a "when-in-doubt-it's-a-defensive-foul" policy, you'd see far more guys going for blocks. You shouldn't reward crappy defenders for just throwing themselves in front of a dribbling player.
That said, more players could take the Larry Johnson/Charles Barkley approach and start damaging people who try to draw a charge so much that they decide it's not a good idea.
Could not agree more. I always talk about this during games. Even when Manu draws a charge I still get annoy many times. It is bad for the game and over time I think it will push people away. I remember when there was contact it was a no call or it went against the defense. Now it amazes me how many offensive fouls are called. What is more amazing is when you consider the rules. What they call "holding position" is a joke. People feet are off the ground, or they are leaning into the defender. If they just call it by the literal rule they would clean up alot of this. But then again without handcheck rules on the perimeter slasher would have a cake walk to the free throw line.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
