The NBA CBA's Future

[zacsoccer6]

Players/Owner's can opt out of the current CBA in 2017 (not sure if that means end of 2016-17 season but I believe it is). After what the super teams have done do you believe owners will push for a hard cap like the NFL has? Could this be the last year of super teams?

The last CBA the owner's wanted competitive balance which is why the put in the luxury tax to prevent owners from going significantly over the cap plus the repeat tax to further punish owners. As evident by super teams the owners don't care about a 50 million luxury tax bill (dan gilbert).

Thoughts? Opinions? Think owner's will lockout the players after this year?

[smalltown]

Players/Owner's can opt out of the current CBA in 2017 (not sure if that means end of 2016-17 season but I believe it is). After what the super teams have done do you believe owners will push for a hard cap like the NFL has? Could this be the last year of super teams?

The last CBA the owner's wanted competitive balance which is why the put in the luxury tax to prevent owners from going significantly over the cap plus the repeat tax to further punish owners. As evident by super teams the owners don't care about a 50 million luxury tax bill (dan gilbert).

Thoughts? Opinions? Think owner's will lockout the players after this year?

I don't think hard cap is the option. I think developing a true minor league system and expanded rosters are.

Teams need to be able to develop cheap back of the rotation talent to drive salaries for none star players down. I don't have a problem with big names getting big pay - the trouble come for teams when there's an arms race for bench players. Which in turn hampers team flexibility to retain and obtain stars.

An expanded roster at the same cap level effectively brings back half salaries down and makes them more portable and potentially valuable.

Expanded NBA roster limit.
Full compliment minor league roster on 2way contracts.

I don't think the Union pushes back against this because overall they'd be increasing their membership and gaining additional money (albeit minor) via the minor league system.

[zacsoccer6]

I don't think hard cap is the option. I think developing a true minor league system and expanded rosters are.

Teams need to be able to develop cheap back of the rotation talent to drive salaries for none star players down. I don't have a problem with big names getting big pay - the trouble come for teams when there's an arms race for bench players. Which in turn hampers team flexibility to retain and obtain stars.

An expanded roster at the same cap level effectively brings back half salaries down and makes them more portable and potentially valuable.

Expanded NBA roster limit.
Full compliment minor league roster on 2way contracts.

I don't think the Union pushes back against this because overall they'd be increasing their membership and gaining additional money (albeit minor) via the minor league system.

Minor league system is a must. The hard cap I think that should happen would replace the luxury tax with it. So you could essentially still go over the cap under same circumstances just where the luxury tax line would be is now a hard cap.

[Earvin32]

I personally would like to see a hard cap like the NFL has. Every team goes into the season will a shot. I know we all would like our teams to keep their big stars, but allowing teams to go over a cap to retain players does not mean there is a hard cap. Baseball does not have a hard cap. Teams that can will spend away. Small market teams hope to build through their farm system and keep the better talent that they develop.

If you want the best player in the league on your team, that is fine, but you would have less money to build a team around him. Talent is condensing around a few teams instead of spreading out so I think the owners will opt out when they can from this deal. Should the size of your wallet determine how good your team is, or how good your GM is at team building and finding the right talent. The NBA needs more competive balance.

Every team also needs a minor league team to develop young players.

[xavieronly1]

We don't even have enough talent to fill 30 teams. I don't see how a farm system is needed. You are not going to help a 18 years old kid to be a superstar in d-league. NBA owners have no problem of giving raw players to play in the NBA games.

At most a d-league would become a rehab places or for bench development.

[inopethflames]

will there be a lockout? take a wild guess. every lockout the owners win, it just depends what increments they gain when they balance losing games/season against getting more of the overall money. 2 lockouts ago the players had 57% of basketball related income. the last lockout the agreed to 50% or 49% or something, i forget. the next lockout theyll eventually agree to less.

also - dont bother listening to any reports right now about how talks are doing really well and everyone is optimistic. this is said the year or two before every lockout because they dont talk about the main topics until the negotiations start in the summer or end of the season. its easy to be agreeable and optimistic when your talking over superfluous things that dont really matter all that much. when they start going over the bulk of the money, thats when things stop and nothing gets settled until games are close to being missed, or games actually are missed. ie 67 game season or whatever that was.

probably in all sports but it seems especially the nba, it takes the pressure of missing games or conceivably missing a season fore both sides to finally make a new deal. and this year will probably be especially bad because the players arent going to fold as easily to the owners when theyve seen the team sale prices, and now the 3x larger tv money. plus the new union boss is a woman and she isnt going to want to be pushed around by the nba, so she will be extra tough, plus she doesnt have the experience of doing an nba deal so that will probably just make it slower and tougher by itself.

i think it is after next season, thats maybe going to make the big free agent summer different, or on hold? or maybe that gets done before the new cba gets finished up.

[jj2]

A hard cap might help to level the playing field a little bit. It would be better than nothing. There's still a lot of teams that are just never going to attract great free agent talent, and it they build a team through the draft the players are probably going to leave for the LA's, Miami's and GSW's of the world when presented with the first opportunity.

It would be nice if you didn't already know with a pretty high degree of certainty who was going to be in the Finals before the season even starts.

[regularp]

Nothing needs to be changed. The league has never had "competitive balance" or parity. Nobody was complaining when Boston and the Lakers had four Hall of Famers in the 80s so nobody should start now.

The league should retroactively award the Lakers one more championship for The Veto though. All this bullsh1t about competitive balance from Dan Gilbert and Marc Cuban, but Gilbert turns right around and assembles a super team when LeBron goes back and Cuban would do the same if the opportunity presented itself.

[pac213up]

They do not need a hard cap but I think the key is too remove max contracts. Let the real superstars eat a higher percentage of the cap. It would be way more difficult to add multiple stars if they were paid there true value relative to what others are getting paid.

[zacsoccer6]

They do not need a hard cap but I think the key is too remove max contracts. Let the real superstars eat a higher percentage of the cap. It would be way more difficult to add multiple stars if they were paid there true value relative to what others are getting paid.

I would like to get rid of max contracts, or if you are going to make a max contract then the contract is a percentage of the cap for that year. So like how Klay Thompson and Kyrie Irving signed max deals in 2014 and are making 16 and 17 million next year while players are signing non max deals for more than that this year. In comparison Drummond's max this year coming off his rookie contract is a average of 26 million. So Klay and Kyrie in my opinion should get 26 million this year instead of the 16/17 million they will be getting if a max was just given as a flat percentage instead of set dollar.

[rdleifriaf]

I think it's important that every franchise has a fan base that believes that if this isn't their year, next year or the year after could be. There are only a few franchises that you look at and think, "Wow, we have a 0% chance of making the big dance within 5-7 years." The balance of power always seems to move from West to East and back again. Crappy teams become good teams and good teams become crappy teams. There's always the hope that your franchise will land the next big free agent, score somebody in a trade, or land the next star in the draft.

A salary cap or the elimination of max contracts would definitely create more parity, but is that what would be best for the league? Allowing more money to flow into the hands of the true superstars would mean a smaller piece of the pie for all the other players in the league as well as these superstars being surrounded by crappy players, which then takes your best players and turns them into losers that aren't as marketable.

All that said, these super teams really are starting hurting league parity far too much. I think the way to go would be to make it a lot less enticing and a lot more painful for free agents to leave the franchises they are with. Just my ten cents.

[zacsoccer6]

I think it's important that every franchise has a fan base that believes that if this isn't their year, next year or the year after could be. There are only a few franchises that you look at and think, "Wow, we have a 0% chance of making the big dance within 5-7 years." The balance of power always seems to move from West to East and back again. Crappy teams become good teams and good teams become crappy teams. There's always the hope that your franchise will land the next big free agent, score somebody in a trade, or land the next star in the draft.

A salary cap or the elimination of max contracts would definitely create more parity, but is that what would be best for the league? Allowing more money to flow into the hands of the true superstars would mean a smaller piece of the pie for all the other players in the league as well as these superstars being surrounded by crappy players, which then takes your best players and turns them into losers that aren't as marketable.

All that said, these super teams really are starting hurting league parity far too much. I think the way to go would be to make it a lot less enticing and a lot more painful for free agents to leave the franchises they are with. Just my ten cents.

Possibly instead of a 5th year contract allow the team with their rights offer 5% more?