NBA Agrees to a New $22.5 Billion TV Deal

[Chinook]

So as has been said recently, the league is considering structuring their new TV deal in a way that "smooths over" the cap e set to hit the league soon. It's possible that 2015-2016 will see an artificially increased salary cap. I wonder if the Spurs would be in favor of that. On one hand, it would allow the team to have a max slot even with the new contracts they handed out over the summer. On the other hand, any contract they sign this July would be bigger than it would have been before. Kawhi's contract could be significantly larger (maybe $10 Million more over the life of the deal). When you factor in a second max contract, it starts to add up pretty quickly.

However, if the Spurs do not give Kawhi an extension this fall, then his cap hold for next summer will remain unchanged regardless of whatever contract Leonard is eligible for. So the team would get the benefit without having to deal with the cost from a 2015 cap perspective. That makes it even less likely in my mind that the Spurs should extend Kawhi this year.

[cd021]

Exactly - they'd be crazy if they don't create a mechanism for smoothing.



When was the last time there was a strike in any major sport? 20 years ago? Players are very very unlikely to do that.



Players got screwed and they'll happily accept the new TV deal without needing to renegotiate as they'll be getting significantly more money as well. If the owners are unwilling to negotiate a change the players will not dare to strike as they'll be taken to the cleaners.


No they don't. And there's already a hard cap for all practical means and purposes tbh.



Philly will happily pay the difference to their roster, just as they'll be doing this season.

-Hard cap and a high luxury tax aren't the same thing (it essentially acts as one for the less deep pocketed teams. As i was saying if the cap jumps to $88 million the luxury tax threshold would be north of $100 million. That could give an advantage back to the bigger market/pocket teams like the Lakers, & Nets. They can exceed $100 million in payroll and not have to pay a dime of luxury tax.

[May have been Bill Simmons] The theory that having a hard cap and removing salary restrictions would create greater parity and create a more even playing field for free agents (whomever has the most money to throw at top free agents would potentially have a leg up) The owners at the very least could counter the proposal to remove salary restrictions with having the players to agreed to have a hard cap in place to keep team salaries from exceeding a certain amount.

The players do want the max salaries to be removed.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-...-max-contracts

Lebron apparently wants the opportunity to make more something similar to Jordan's 96-97 and 97-98 salary. MJ made $30.1 million (equivalent to $43.8 million today) and 33.1 million (equivalent to $48.4 million today) for two seasons.

Lebron would be eligible for around $30 million per year (around $150,000,000 over the life of the deal) Still far short of that. The max salaries affect more players than just Lebron

0-6 seasons 25% of the cap
7-9 seasons- 30% of the cap
10+ seasons- 35% of the cap

Another issue would be the rookie scale. If the CBA remains intact. #1 picks would only make up to $6 million while the actual cap would be nearly $90 million. The #30th pick would only make around $1 million. The players union would almost certainly want the rookie scale altered to be proportional to the rising cap.

Also the minimum salaries would still be need to be changed as well.

-I mentioned Philly as an example but were talking the difference between $56 million and $79 million. Bad teams would be forced to payout a ridiculous sum to field an awful team.

-There are still some unresolved issues from the previous CBA negotiations. At the very least it would make sense for some negotiations to take place next summer. Silver has been on the record for wanting at least 2 years of college (not a fan of that one, personally). They could finally make a decision of that along with other issues.

[Chinook]

-Hard cap and a high luxury tax aren't the same thing (it essentially acts as one for the less deep pocketed teams. As i was saying if the cap jumps to $88 million the luxury tax threshold would be north of $100 million. That could give an advantage back to the bigger market/pocket teams like the Lakers, & Nets. They can exceed $100 million in payroll and not have to pay a dime of luxury tax.

It doesn't really help any markets. All teams will get $88-100 Million to spend since they're getting their share of the new TV money. If anything, the increase will help small-market teams like the Spurs and Thunder, who would all of the sudden have a ton of potential cash to hand out without having to pay the tax.

[May have been Bill Simmons] The theory that having a hard cap and removing salary restrictions would create greater parity and create a more even playing field for free agents (whomever has the most money to throw at top free agents would potentially have a leg up) The owners at the very least could counter the proposal to remove salary restrictions with having the players to agreed to have a hard cap in place to keep team salaries from exceeding a certain amount.

Main reason why this is a non-starter. Superstars are going to come out of these negotiations looking really bad.

The players do want the max salaries to be removed.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-...-max-contracts

That seems to say that max players want more money. Not surprising at all. Once agents get into this, it'll become clear that there's little support for this among the general populace of players.

Another issue would be the rookie scale. If the CBA remains intact. #1 picks would only make up to $6 million while the actual cap would be nearly $90 million. The #30th pick would only make around $1 million. The players union would almost certainly want the rookie scale altered to be proportional to the rising cap.

Will probably be part of the smoothing process. The MLE is also going to be ridiculously low.

-I mentioned Philly as an example but were talking the difference between $56 million and $79 million. Bad teams would be forced to payout a ridiculous sum to field an awful team.

Not a big deal. They'll be getting a ton of money even though they're not earning it. Plus, if that encourages them to not tank, all the better.

-There are still some unresolved issues from the previous CBA negotiations. At the very least it would make sense for some negotiations to take place next summer. Silver has been on the record for wanting at least 2 years of college (not a fan of that one, personally). They could finally make a decision of that along with other issues.

I simply see no reason why the two sides wouldn't start negotiations this season. As I said before, the league and union will most likely hammer out some things for next summer in order to avoid a huge e in salaries. We'll see exactly what that ends up being.