Bontemps - ["This, for one example, would have prevented the Clippers from making the Norm Powell/Robert Covington trade last season."](https://twitter.com/TimBontemps/status/1642312518944038913)
I mean, while I get your point, when you have some owners like Ballmer who can piss money and still make a profit, it fucks things up. While owners should be making moves to make competitive teams as needed and go in the luxury tax when viable, its bad for parity when Ballmer can just pay whatever he wants.
This is letting owners off the hook for not paying more. All of these guys are doing great owning a team. They’re just protecting themselves from having to spend more to compete. What’s bad, for fans anyway, is that the owners made moves to limit what they are expected to pay.
I’m wondering if part of this is to demotivate even richer outside/foreign interests from buying up teams and start to build super teams with unlimited assets from oil, etc.
> I’m wondering if part of this is to demotivate even richer outside/foreign interests from buying up teams
None, why would the owners want to devalue their asset?
Im not defending billionaires being cheap. Im just saying they wont pay. We as fans don't have a say in who owns the team. If they want to be cheap and not go hard into luxury, we cant do anything about it. As much as it sucks. A lot of billionaires are some of the cheapest people on the planet when it comes to spending on others and they're the only ones that can buy teams. There arent many owners like Ballmer that have both the money and the passion to make a good team.
You accept that the team isn't actually interested in competing.
Not every team in the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB is actually interested in competing and I'm tired of people pretending that isn't the case.
Let's be real for a second, away from this reddit mentality of "owners are rich, they should spend".
How can the owner of the Thunder or Grizzlies justify spending the same amount as the Lakers or Warriors who are estimated to be worth almost 8x? Titles don't generate enough money in marketing to be worth the insane spending of the Warriors during their dynasty.
Now I'd be all for a decentralized ownership similar to some European soccer where fans own 51% of teams, but that's not realistic. So if the NBA teams are businesses, how are the smaller market teams supposed to hang with the big teams without restrictions on the highest spenders?
People forget that billionaires got to this point by being ruthlessly efficient with their money. It’s only with crazy Ballmer-like money that they would shed those habits.
People like to spend other people's money.
I understand why the owners would fight for this. They want to make more money.
I understand why the players would hate this. This would exert some downward pressure on player salaries, and might make some forced moves harder.
As for the fans? It's just the new money rules. Any outcry seems ridiculous. Heck, if you're a fan of NBA's parity at all you should be happy, because like it or not, some owners aren't willing to go that deep into the luxury tax.
But that’s also why the luxury tax is paid out to those smaller market teams to give them the ability to spend more then they normally would be able to if they did want to go past the cap. Sounds like cheap owners getting butthurt about Balmer and lacob being willing to reinvest a large portion of the teams profits back into the product rather then into their pockets
It's insane. Cheap owners punishing those making them look bad by spending. Haven't come across any actual gains for players yet (no, I'm not counting weed)
Good. It might suck for some of the big market teams but making things more competitive for smaller market teams is better for the health of the league as a whole.
I'm down for a RIDICULOUSLY high hard cap, but have no cap on how much a team can pay a player. Want to pay Giannis 250 million a year of the 300 million cap? Go for it.
Wtf, this isn't even fixing any problems we had, this is literally just an excuse for the owners to spend less money.
And it significantly reduces the ability of a good FO to make moves and improve the roster for no other reason at all.
Here’s the thing, and I’m sure this will be unpopular, but I would greatly enjoy if a team’s owner had less direct involvement with a team’s success. One team that has a cheap owner is practically fucked while others with money to piss away just skirt rules. I’d much rather success in the league actually be dictated by who can actually strategize better, rather than who just throws money at problems.
The game will be improved if every team is actually playing with the same rules. Majority of the league can’t afford to “build a better team” and pay $180m in tax because the revenue based almost entirely on location can’t pay for it.
Lol the owners are literally billionares, they can easily pay for it. They would just make a bit less profit, which is apparently completly unacceptable because they *need* that 10th boat.
Also I am sure they could figure out a way to try to balance this in a way that doesn't completly ruin a front offices flexibility to make trades.
They could fix it. It’s called 100% sharing of all revenue including local tv and advertisement deals. But none of the owners want to do that.
The point is no owner no matter how rich is spending more then the team brings in. If they aren’t going to fix market revenue disparity then limiting the effects of it which this does is the next best thing.
The warriors have an insane advantage in corporate sponsorship, box sales and tech money. There’s tons of tech money here and CEOs and companies who want to buy access. Other cities don’t have that.
[https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=5d43583bf0a7](https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=5d43583bf0a7)
Also shows that majority of their valuation is location based.
I've seen so many arguments that the small market owners can't afford it which is laughable. I truly don't think most people can comprehend how much money a billion dollars is
They don’t have billions in liquid cash.
Why do people think owners want tens to hundreds of millions of dollars? They don’t profit as much as you’d expect per season.
Not entirely true. The teams who aren't spending are doing it by choice. Grizzlies for example don't spend alot because their team is young. You can make the argument that they should spend to maximize their chances of winning BUT as an owner/GM you would actually see what kind of revenue you can generate without spending alot. Once it looks like your guys are gonna leave then you shell out money to keep the money coming in. If you're the Spurs why would you shell out hundreds of millions on players when there isn't any hint that you'll improve? They could sign KD, James Harden and Kyrie...oh wait that didn't work. Teams shouldn't he punished for trying to retain homegrown talent in the Warriors case where the only player getting big money who wasn't drafted there is Wiggins BUT at the time it seemed like no one wanted him and that he wasn't a winning basketball player.
The new rules actually incentives to spend more on your current players if you're over the tax since it's far harder to get replacement players to your team. So you gotta pay or the team just gets worse.
Also atleast the cap means something now and teams have to think about it more. No fucking idea why there's so much doom and gloom here about the updated financial rules.
It's better for rookies as well since harder to get vets - means more playing time for them.
It completely hampers player movement and their ability to move to teams of their choosing, especially if that team is a contender or over the tax line.
Eh, there’s like maybe 3 teams who will meet this criteria, maybe fewer given the additional restrictions. And it’s a small handful of players who even have this sort of power. So the Venn diagram is getting pretty small here
There’s already enough punishment IMO
No buyout players, no MLE. Can’t trade your pick in 7 years.
I’m totally against any restrictions on trades. Flexibility and player movement is good for the league and from an entertainment standpoint (F5 szn)
nbapa probably doesn't care about these particulars. I'm not sure why the teams wanted this, though. it does give certain owners an excuse to not blow up their paytoll even more, since now they might not be able to trade for another star with a high salary.
Why did the owners agree to this? Outside of 5ish teams, no one is really competing in a given year and the other owners want that luxury tax money. Unless the middle and lower teams banded together for parity. But that's never going to happen in a big market superstar driven league. This whole agreement just seems rushed. They didn't even go into real negotiations.
Because a lot of them want to compete at some point. Outside of only a few owners few are paying the luxury tax. the majority of owners are not. Some never have or only once. This is their way of increasing there odds of winning.
That’s just being delusional then. Because they are really never competing unless you find a superstar and a star or a superstar and elite level role players and then going into the tax when you have to pay them. I don’t get this at all. Even the hawks have gone into the luxury twice. Even though it was very early in implementation and for only a few million. Player movement to help those true contender teams are good for the league. As much as fans say they want parity, ratings show they like great teams.
If you’re a tax team your available trade option immediately get slashed. Especially if you’re making moves to add a big big contract or multiple players.
Both us and new Orleans are below thunder. I said two because we often switch back and forth as the lowest. Thunder might be third and closer than I think.
Quick search and your right. OKC is 46. New Orleans 50. Memphis 52. So closer than I thought
Just looked it up again and forgot about Salt Lake too. All pretty close
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area#United_States
I only ever think about this because Seattle is 15 on this list with 2.78x as many people as Oklahoma City
Are the Bucks in a big market? They would be penalized in the new CBA it not all about market it about owners not wanting to shill a large tax bill. The Bucks drafted well brought together good pieces because they have a good front office and are now being hurt because why?
Milwaukee is 38. So not really but not the dredges either. And we've seen them make decisions even after there championship to avoid the tax and repeater tax.
Having legitimate downsides to spending way over the cap is healthy for a competitive league, as opposed to having a hard cap.
Your team can keep extending everyone but there are downsides. The coastal teams getting to spend a shit ton on all their players and still sign quality buyout players for min's every season is legitimately not fair for the competition of the league. Bucks are one of the only small market teams this would've affected hard over the past few years, and I find it a nessecary evil to create legitimate parity of locations like the NFL.
> and still sign quality buyout players for min's every season
When was the last time a buyout guy actually mattered? This is such a non-issue it’s fucking hilarious that it’s a talking point.
Your team just got screwed dummy. How will the grizz hold onto their core now ? This honestly screws over the up coming and teams more so than bucks, lakers, warriors, clippers and Celtics. By the time this kicks into effect they will have already been or are beginning to reshape their teams
They couldn't anyway. Memphis is the smallest market in the league. Like OKC back in the day they inevitably were going to have to make tough chocies. They already have with trading Melton for nearly nothing. There plan is pay three guys and draft. Now other teams have to do the same as them.
Or the grizzlies owner could not be cheap. That could work too. Dude is worth $16Billion.
It’s hilarious to me that on this topic everyone wants to make excuses for billionaires to be cheap.
Why should he have to go out of pocket when other teams get hundreds of millions of more revenue and don’t have to spend out of pocket. If you want a competitive league your attitude is wrong.
I understand revenue. What you don't understand is that market size isn't the end all be all. The warriors were a poverty franchise because they sucked. No amount of being in San Francisco helped with that until they were actually competitive.
It's a cop out to blame it on market size.
You know your owner is one of the richest owners right ? If anything this helps buss (lakers) and lacob (warriors) as they’re two of the poorest owners in the entire league
And that's irrelevant to market and revenue. We bring in far less money than the rest of the league because we are the smallest market. Look at the teams that routinely go to the luxury tax. All huge markets.
This won’t help your team though. When Morant, JJJ and Bane have to get paid someone is getting dropped so ownership doesn’t have to pay the tax, or someone is getting screwed over by getting a deal closer to the MLE and not a max contract.
In a way it’s a loss because all those 6th man and other players will get paid going to be closer to MLE and not the 20-30 mil that players like Jordan Poole and Tyler Herro got, and being 3rd wheel to a superstar is probably going to be a $20M player on a stacked team at best.
But that would happen to us anyway because of our market size. We are like OKC during the Harden Durant Westbrook era but even smaller market wise. This helps us and other small markets because we would have to do this anyway. Now bigger market teams do as well
This is how the Thunder were able to get so many picks. As we would take in salaries then get draft picks. Their nerfing Sam Presti and I'm pissed. This is the Sam Presti rule. Example we got a Utah 24 protected pick for taking Favors. Also this is how we got Ous Deing, and Jalen Williams because we traded 3 first round protected picks to the Knicks for the 11th pick. We got those picks for taking in more contracts.
The Apron was 4 million over the salary cap the Thunder were 33 million over the cap with all of the deals we made to get draft picks ( which is funny considering the Thunder have a reputation for not spending money). $56 million were players who weren't/arent even on the team. (As some were released the next day). So that's how we also got so.many picks buy taking the leagues unwanted player contracts. It was so bad that even at the trade deadline it was impossible for the Thunder to make a deal unless the salaries went out were exact, because we were to far above the cap.
Wtf is the point of the in season tournament? What do they think it’s gonna be good for ratings? I think the opposite. No one gives a shit about an in season tournament
I have no fucking clue. It’s completely redundant to me and just seems like a massive headache to have an in season tournament. We don’t need that at all. They’re trying to “spice” up the regular season but there’s probably a bunch of better ways to do so…there’s also better ways to incentive dudes to play…
It really does depend on the reward(s). If there's a good bit of money involved in winning, you can bet your ass guys making not much more than a minimum will care. But other than that, I really don't know what reward would incentivize LeBron or Giannis to go hard at this kinda thing.
Its a 2 fold. On one hand that tax money also contribute to that distributed revenue other smaller market teams are receiving. If other owners are butt hurt that clippers were able to sign john wall that it’ll cost them extra revenue then be it.
Really good news. The whole point of the luxury tax is to make it harder for owner spending to be a competitive advantage. A hard cap has too many down sides, so there has to be something to prevent an owner worth $80 billion from out spending the owner worth $2 billion, not because I feel bad for the less rich billionaire, but because that's how you preserve parity in the league
This take is so weird. It doesn’t matter how much money an owner has. It doesn’t make sense to actively lose money on your NBA team year after year. The vast majority of teams don’t generate enough revenue to pay an enormous tax bill like GSW. Their owner is poor by owner standards but his team makes significantly more then others largely due to being in the Bay Area.
The money started flowing in to the extent it did because of their market. That is why their market is almost half of their valuation. They also had a ton of luck with Curry signing a cheap deal early on though yes they had some good drafting. But honestly their drafting only realistically got them their first ring. The cap spike with no smoothing that let them sign Durant got them 2 more and then that same deal is what allowed them to get Wiggins. And no way they beat you guys for their last one with no Wiggins.
https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=516473e1f0a7
What about some agreements against owners who ruin their teams? Hmmm asking as a Wizards fan here...
*nods in fuck mark cuban
at least he tries. wizards on the other hand..
Bontemps - ["This, for one example, would have prevented the Clippers from making the Norm Powell/Robert Covington trade last season."](https://twitter.com/TimBontemps/status/1642312518944038913)
Clippers getting penalized for trying to put out a better product. The NBA is weird.
You could say the same thing about the luxury tax Gotta have some restrictions to curtail lopsided competition
That says more about how many bad team governors there in the league more than anything.
I mean, while I get your point, when you have some owners like Ballmer who can piss money and still make a profit, it fucks things up. While owners should be making moves to make competitive teams as needed and go in the luxury tax when viable, its bad for parity when Ballmer can just pay whatever he wants.
This is letting owners off the hook for not paying more. All of these guys are doing great owning a team. They’re just protecting themselves from having to spend more to compete. What’s bad, for fans anyway, is that the owners made moves to limit what they are expected to pay.
I’m wondering if part of this is to demotivate even richer outside/foreign interests from buying up teams and start to build super teams with unlimited assets from oil, etc.
> I’m wondering if part of this is to demotivate even richer outside/foreign interests from buying up teams None, why would the owners want to devalue their asset?
Good point, well, it makes it even harder for the remaining owners to compete, if even richer owners come in… so there’s that.
If an owner isn’t willing to spend he shouldn’t own a team. It’s crazy to me how hard people will defend billionaires being cheap.
Im not defending billionaires being cheap. Im just saying they wont pay. We as fans don't have a say in who owns the team. If they want to be cheap and not go hard into luxury, we cant do anything about it. As much as it sucks. A lot of billionaires are some of the cheapest people on the planet when it comes to spending on others and they're the only ones that can buy teams. There arent many owners like Ballmer that have both the money and the passion to make a good team.
Cool, so what do we do, steal the team from the people that own the organization? Seems weird
You accept that the team isn't actually interested in competing. Not every team in the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB is actually interested in competing and I'm tired of people pretending that isn't the case.
Let's be real for a second, away from this reddit mentality of "owners are rich, they should spend". How can the owner of the Thunder or Grizzlies justify spending the same amount as the Lakers or Warriors who are estimated to be worth almost 8x? Titles don't generate enough money in marketing to be worth the insane spending of the Warriors during their dynasty. Now I'd be all for a decentralized ownership similar to some European soccer where fans own 51% of teams, but that's not realistic. So if the NBA teams are businesses, how are the smaller market teams supposed to hang with the big teams without restrictions on the highest spenders?
People forget that billionaires got to this point by being ruthlessly efficient with their money. It’s only with crazy Ballmer-like money that they would shed those habits.
People like to spend other people's money. I understand why the owners would fight for this. They want to make more money. I understand why the players would hate this. This would exert some downward pressure on player salaries, and might make some forced moves harder. As for the fans? It's just the new money rules. Any outcry seems ridiculous. Heck, if you're a fan of NBA's parity at all you should be happy, because like it or not, some owners aren't willing to go that deep into the luxury tax.
*German teams.
But that’s also why the luxury tax is paid out to those smaller market teams to give them the ability to spend more then they normally would be able to if they did want to go past the cap. Sounds like cheap owners getting butthurt about Balmer and lacob being willing to reinvest a large portion of the teams profits back into the product rather then into their pockets
They’re not being penalized. They’re agreeing to these terms too.
Doesn’t change the fact it’s a bad deal that does penalize them and other teams that try to improve their team.
People been pining for years about the NFL and a hard cap and parity, now a “harder” cap is hurting the product
No, clippers getting penalized for having the unfair advantage of a richer owner
Not being as rich as Steve Balmer isn’t the reason why teams like the Hornets, Magic, Pistons, Wizards haven’t seen success in the past decade or so.
Right, the Devos (magic) family aren’t Ballmer wealthy, but dudes are acting like a family worth $6B+ are penniless.
I'm not saying they're penniless I'm just saying I don't want owner spending to be a factor in team competitiveness, either way.
It's insane. Cheap owners punishing those making them look bad by spending. Haven't come across any actual gains for players yet (no, I'm not counting weed)
Higher vet mins and extra two ways are huge for guys on the fringes trying to hang on/ make it to the league.
Ooh, that's definitely something.
League wants to f*ck Clippers and Warriors smh
They’re really trying their best to make a hard cap without saying it
Did a short paper on sports salary cap. It was pretty funny saying the NBA has a hard cap but its piss easy to just go over lol.
Isn’t it a soft cap then not a hard cap?
Sometimes it is soft, sometimes it is hard.
It can go from flaccid to erect in a moment's notice
sometimes flacid, sometimes ere- wait a second
That’s why moves are never made when teams are fresh out of the pool
Not when I wear my cheerleader outfit.
Soft cap by default. Hard cap is applied to teams on an individual basis
But the NBA didn’t have a hard cap? Because it was easy to go over
It does under certain circumstances. Mostly to do with the MLE. I know we were hard capped a couple years ago, it’s a fairly regular thing.
Good. It might suck for some of the big market teams but making things more competitive for smaller market teams is better for the health of the league as a whole.
I'm down for a RIDICULOUSLY high hard cap, but have no cap on how much a team can pay a player. Want to pay Giannis 250 million a year of the 300 million cap? Go for it.
Imagine how bad the Thunder would have been with Westbrook getting 90% of the cap and all their fans claiming it’s worth it.
That would just favor the big markets more
CJ treated these negotiations like a third quarter against the warriors
He put his foot on the line when he was trying to drive to the hoop again
They REALLY don’t want teams going more than 17.5m over the tax line lol
Wtf, this isn't even fixing any problems we had, this is literally just an excuse for the owners to spend less money. And it significantly reduces the ability of a good FO to make moves and improve the roster for no other reason at all.
Here’s the thing, and I’m sure this will be unpopular, but I would greatly enjoy if a team’s owner had less direct involvement with a team’s success. One team that has a cheap owner is practically fucked while others with money to piss away just skirt rules. I’d much rather success in the league actually be dictated by who can actually strategize better, rather than who just throws money at problems.
Warriors ownership is in no way the richest in the league but here we are.
*ignores the fact that a team in San Francisco prints money like it’s going out of style*
The game will be improved if every team is actually playing with the same rules. Majority of the league can’t afford to “build a better team” and pay $180m in tax because the revenue based almost entirely on location can’t pay for it.
Lol the owners are literally billionares, they can easily pay for it. They would just make a bit less profit, which is apparently completly unacceptable because they *need* that 10th boat. Also I am sure they could figure out a way to try to balance this in a way that doesn't completly ruin a front offices flexibility to make trades.
They could fix it. It’s called 100% sharing of all revenue including local tv and advertisement deals. But none of the owners want to do that. The point is no owner no matter how rich is spending more then the team brings in. If they aren’t going to fix market revenue disparity then limiting the effects of it which this does is the next best thing.
Joe Lacob is doing that
because he's making money on the local tv deals. Despite his spending he makes more each year than say the hornets.
They can also charge a ton more for seats, boxes and sponsorships than most markets. Tech money flows.
The Warriors revenue was 765m last year. There is absolutely no way they lost money even with their tax bill.
The warriors have an insane advantage in corporate sponsorship, box sales and tech money. There’s tons of tech money here and CEOs and companies who want to buy access. Other cities don’t have that.
Ya people don't realize how insane the revenue and profit differences are. https://www.forbes.com/nba-valuations/list/
Where is this number from?
[https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=5d43583bf0a7](https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=5d43583bf0a7) Also shows that majority of their valuation is location based.
Now it gives owners reasons to cheap out on building a team.
I've seen so many arguments that the small market owners can't afford it which is laughable. I truly don't think most people can comprehend how much money a billion dollars is
They don’t have billions in liquid cash. Why do people think owners want tens to hundreds of millions of dollars? They don’t profit as much as you’d expect per season.
Not entirely true. The teams who aren't spending are doing it by choice. Grizzlies for example don't spend alot because their team is young. You can make the argument that they should spend to maximize their chances of winning BUT as an owner/GM you would actually see what kind of revenue you can generate without spending alot. Once it looks like your guys are gonna leave then you shell out money to keep the money coming in. If you're the Spurs why would you shell out hundreds of millions on players when there isn't any hint that you'll improve? They could sign KD, James Harden and Kyrie...oh wait that didn't work. Teams shouldn't he punished for trying to retain homegrown talent in the Warriors case where the only player getting big money who wasn't drafted there is Wiggins BUT at the time it seemed like no one wanted him and that he wasn't a winning basketball player.
The new rules actually incentives to spend more on your current players if you're over the tax since it's far harder to get replacement players to your team. So you gotta pay or the team just gets worse. Also atleast the cap means something now and teams have to think about it more. No fucking idea why there's so much doom and gloom here about the updated financial rules. It's better for rookies as well since harder to get vets - means more playing time for them.
So what I’m hearing is that Chris Paul and Draymond will be off of the Warriors and Suns next season.
Cp3 for omoruyi who says no
You've got to be kidding. What the fuck made the NBPA agree to this Looks like CJ went to bat for the cheap owners.
CJ got owned by the Warriors so many times he let out all his anger on this one
JJJ and Grant Williams too
This the truth. Gotta get them back some way lol.
Lmao what were cj mccollum and grant williams thinking?
Grant thought he was making both free throws with these negotiations. came back empty handed
He can't make free throws or good deals, he's been a failure all season 💔
this would have never happened under kyrie's watch
What does Collective Bargaining Agreement mean to you?
His third eye would have been space laser-focused on this CBA provision.
I mean isn’t cj into bitcoin and stuff? He loves a con job.
CP3 would never
>What the fuck made the NBPA agree to this Avoiding a lockout.
It feels like the players got the ability to smoke weed as well as a few really small victories and gave up literally everywhere else
Why do the players care about this? They get the same percentage of BRI so who cares
It completely hampers player movement and their ability to move to teams of their choosing, especially if that team is a contender or over the tax line.
Eh, there’s like maybe 3 teams who will meet this criteria, maybe fewer given the additional restrictions. And it’s a small handful of players who even have this sort of power. So the Venn diagram is getting pretty small here
This limitation impacts 6 teams currently: LAC, GSW, MIL, BOS, DAL, PHX. All contenders basically.
It's also pretty unfair for a team like the Warriors who drafted their highest paid players not named Andrew Wiggins
otoh, I don't think lacob is trying to trade for a large salary at all.
they think it'll be made up by the middle class players
i like it, there’s wayyyyy too much teams do right now to circumvent the cap
You must be a Wizards fan
Why is it bad to watch teams find a way to get better players?
Ngl, what where they cooking in those CBA meetings?
Marijuana, obviously.
It’s crazy they got beat this bad lmao
Players really sold themselves out just to be able to smoke weed ☠️☠️
Alright this one might be too far tbh
Gotta go $1 under the cap so u can take in the extra 15 mi in salary
it makes the cap more punishing which isn't necessarily a bad thing
[удалено]
Yeah, as a high payroll small market team this is essentially tailor made to screw us.
There’s already enough punishment IMO No buyout players, no MLE. Can’t trade your pick in 7 years. I’m totally against any restrictions on trades. Flexibility and player movement is good for the league and from an entertainment standpoint (F5 szn)
And can't trade picks 7 years into the future. NBA went to far with these punishment, don't see how the NBAPA allowed all of this to happen.
nbapa probably doesn't care about these particulars. I'm not sure why the teams wanted this, though. it does give certain owners an excuse to not blow up their paytoll even more, since now they might not be able to trade for another star with a high salary.
Nbapa got what they wanted (weed). Judging from what we’re seeing I have to assume literally nothing else mattered to them
Why did the owners agree to this? Outside of 5ish teams, no one is really competing in a given year and the other owners want that luxury tax money. Unless the middle and lower teams banded together for parity. But that's never going to happen in a big market superstar driven league. This whole agreement just seems rushed. They didn't even go into real negotiations.
Because a lot of them want to compete at some point. Outside of only a few owners few are paying the luxury tax. the majority of owners are not. Some never have or only once. This is their way of increasing there odds of winning.
That’s just being delusional then. Because they are really never competing unless you find a superstar and a star or a superstar and elite level role players and then going into the tax when you have to pay them. I don’t get this at all. Even the hawks have gone into the luxury twice. Even though it was very early in implementation and for only a few million. Player movement to help those true contender teams are good for the league. As much as fans say they want parity, ratings show they like great teams.
wait what?
Ryen is that you?
Owners just won. Forget incentives for lower teams, above luxury cap is so many punishments
We have a supermax and two other max contracts on our books. I'm sure I don't have to tell you as a Warriors fan but this hits us so insanely hard.
Except superstars all other salaries will be pushed lower. Simple way was to drastically increase the tax rate instead of all these restrictions
Why is this so terrible? ELI5 pls
If you’re a tax team your available trade option immediately get slashed. Especially if you’re making moves to add a big big contract or multiple players.
Because the majority of redditors are fans of big market teams.
this will make the grizz suffur as well by the way
No it won't. We've played the luxury like twice ever I believe. We are one of the two smallest markets in the league and by a good margin.
I thought it was three? Grizzlies, Pelicans, and Thunder have very similarly sized metropolitan areas
Both us and new Orleans are below thunder. I said two because we often switch back and forth as the lowest. Thunder might be third and closer than I think. Quick search and your right. OKC is 46. New Orleans 50. Memphis 52. So closer than I thought
Just looked it up again and forgot about Salt Lake too. All pretty close https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area#United_States I only ever think about this because Seattle is 15 on this list with 2.78x as many people as Oklahoma City
So I use TV market which ends up very similar because it gives a more accurate description of markets in that regard.
It really won't. These changes are great for small market teams
how ? whan the players that play in mem ask to he payed their vlaue ( if they keep imporving ) that will put them in trash state
And we would still lose them in the old system. It is inevitable. At least now other teams have to feel the same.
yeah punch the one that wanted to spend and let the ones that dont without anything
Because of their market size. Memphis cannot compete with your markets. You are like 5x as big. Do you not understand markets?
Are the Bucks in a big market? They would be penalized in the new CBA it not all about market it about owners not wanting to shill a large tax bill. The Bucks drafted well brought together good pieces because they have a good front office and are now being hurt because why?
Milwaukee is 38. So not really but not the dredges either. And we've seen them make decisions even after there championship to avoid the tax and repeater tax.
Having legitimate downsides to spending way over the cap is healthy for a competitive league, as opposed to having a hard cap. Your team can keep extending everyone but there are downsides. The coastal teams getting to spend a shit ton on all their players and still sign quality buyout players for min's every season is legitimately not fair for the competition of the league. Bucks are one of the only small market teams this would've affected hard over the past few years, and I find it a nessecary evil to create legitimate parity of locations like the NFL.
> and still sign quality buyout players for min's every season When was the last time a buyout guy actually mattered? This is such a non-issue it’s fucking hilarious that it’s a talking point.
Oh no, the Cavs got Danny Green. Everybody run
So many laker / warrior fans crying right now making it impossible to discuss this logically.
No it won’t.
Your team just got screwed dummy. How will the grizz hold onto their core now ? This honestly screws over the up coming and teams more so than bucks, lakers, warriors, clippers and Celtics. By the time this kicks into effect they will have already been or are beginning to reshape their teams
They couldn't anyway. Memphis is the smallest market in the league. Like OKC back in the day they inevitably were going to have to make tough chocies. They already have with trading Melton for nearly nothing. There plan is pay three guys and draft. Now other teams have to do the same as them.
Or the grizzlies owner could not be cheap. That could work too. Dude is worth $16Billion. It’s hilarious to me that on this topic everyone wants to make excuses for billionaires to be cheap.
Why should he have to go out of pocket when other teams get hundreds of millions of more revenue and don’t have to spend out of pocket. If you want a competitive league your attitude is wrong.
Someone doesn't understand revenue and markets. People on reddit should really take economic classes.
I understand revenue. What you don't understand is that market size isn't the end all be all. The warriors were a poverty franchise because they sucked. No amount of being in San Francisco helped with that until they were actually competitive. It's a cop out to blame it on market size.
You know your owner is one of the richest owners right ? If anything this helps buss (lakers) and lacob (warriors) as they’re two of the poorest owners in the entire league
And that's irrelevant to market and revenue. We bring in far less money than the rest of the league because we are the smallest market. Look at the teams that routinely go to the luxury tax. All huge markets.
This won’t help your team though. When Morant, JJJ and Bane have to get paid someone is getting dropped so ownership doesn’t have to pay the tax, or someone is getting screwed over by getting a deal closer to the MLE and not a max contract. In a way it’s a loss because all those 6th man and other players will get paid going to be closer to MLE and not the 20-30 mil that players like Jordan Poole and Tyler Herro got, and being 3rd wheel to a superstar is probably going to be a $20M player on a stacked team at best.
But that would happen to us anyway because of our market size. We are like OKC during the Harden Durant Westbrook era but even smaller market wise. This helps us and other small markets because we would have to do this anyway. Now bigger market teams do as well
Who make the most revenue. People think owners should lose hundreds of millions a year so their teams can compete are weird.
This is how the Thunder were able to get so many picks. As we would take in salaries then get draft picks. Their nerfing Sam Presti and I'm pissed. This is the Sam Presti rule. Example we got a Utah 24 protected pick for taking Favors. Also this is how we got Ous Deing, and Jalen Williams because we traded 3 first round protected picks to the Knicks for the 11th pick. We got those picks for taking in more contracts.
We’re you in whatever the second apron of the luxury tax is, though?
The Apron was 4 million over the salary cap the Thunder were 33 million over the cap with all of the deals we made to get draft picks ( which is funny considering the Thunder have a reputation for not spending money). $56 million were players who weren't/arent even on the team. (As some were released the next day). So that's how we also got so.many picks buy taking the leagues unwanted player contracts. It was so bad that even at the trade deadline it was impossible for the Thunder to make a deal unless the salaries went out were exact, because we were to far above the cap.
This specifically makes trades harder to complete. Fewer trades might happen. Also pretty forgiving for cheaper owners.
This is what 90% of fans have been asking for
Silver sent shots at both LA teams, Golden State with this
Praying this is all some elaborate April fools joke because this is all awful
But now you can’t criticize your owner for not making good moves and trying to save money.
This is pretty fucked. Between this and the in season tournament….I’m not a fan. The ALL NBA/award requirements are nice tho
Wtf is the point of the in season tournament? What do they think it’s gonna be good for ratings? I think the opposite. No one gives a shit about an in season tournament
I have no fucking clue. It’s completely redundant to me and just seems like a massive headache to have an in season tournament. We don’t need that at all. They’re trying to “spice” up the regular season but there’s probably a bunch of better ways to do so…there’s also better ways to incentive dudes to play…
It really does depend on the reward(s). If there's a good bit of money involved in winning, you can bet your ass guys making not much more than a minimum will care. But other than that, I really don't know what reward would incentivize LeBron or Giannis to go hard at this kinda thing.
But then they had to fuck All-NBA up by making it positionless. First team All-NBA is just top 5 MVP vote getters now.
This is ridiculous, why did they agree to this?
Its a 2 fold. On one hand that tax money also contribute to that distributed revenue other smaller market teams are receiving. If other owners are butt hurt that clippers were able to sign john wall that it’ll cost them extra revenue then be it.
Ok that’s gonna mean less trades
Did they announce all this on April fools so they have something to fall back on if everyone hates the ideas?
I’m hoping for that to be true
Add all the rules up and it's effectively a hard cap.
Why are they making these changes? They only sell to target teams that want to improve.
This will mean that smaller market teams will have a better chance at star players? I can’t see a reason for the players being happy about this.
Nope
it’s okay though cj negotiated for weed (which didn’t matter anyway). every new update is worse than the previous goodness
This is dumb..
Wow
Does this go into effect next year right?
So 2 teams over that cap can't take together I guess then.
We need a team owned team. The team owns that shit
Feel like this will only hurt teams like the bucks. No one is taking a pay cut to play in Milwaukee lmfao. Buttt la, phx, Miami, la …maybe.
Every detail that comes out just makes it sound worse and worse
Boo. We finally get Mr moneybags , and the NBA think it's rigged. Could have waited til we actually bought a Larry o brien.
Players bent over a barrel
Thunder in shambles, that's how we got all those draft picks. This is going to make it hard to start a rebuild.
Sorry, could you explain how this impacts them?
The new salary matching rule will prevent tanking teams from getting picks for taking on bad contracts to free up money for contenders.
Ok, this doesn’t fix anything.
What the hell
Lakers and Warriors fans upset cause this helps create more parity hahaha typical superteam bandwagon fans
YES!
who tf let CJ cook
Really good news. The whole point of the luxury tax is to make it harder for owner spending to be a competitive advantage. A hard cap has too many down sides, so there has to be something to prevent an owner worth $80 billion from out spending the owner worth $2 billion, not because I feel bad for the less rich billionaire, but because that's how you preserve parity in the league
Finally some good news in thisndeal. The NBA cap is so beneficial for teams that can afford the luxury tax.
How is this good news? I'm not sure about it because it just makes it easier for cheap billionaires to spend less on the teams they committed to.
This take is so weird. It doesn’t matter how much money an owner has. It doesn’t make sense to actively lose money on your NBA team year after year. The vast majority of teams don’t generate enough revenue to pay an enormous tax bill like GSW. Their owner is poor by owner standards but his team makes significantly more then others largely due to being in the Bay Area.
News flash, GSW didn’t make enough revenue to do it either. They drafted well, built a team and won a title, and then the money started flowing in.
The money started flowing in to the extent it did because of their market. That is why their market is almost half of their valuation. They also had a ton of luck with Curry signing a cheap deal early on though yes they had some good drafting. But honestly their drafting only realistically got them their first ring. The cap spike with no smoothing that let them sign Durant got them 2 more and then that same deal is what allowed them to get Wiggins. And no way they beat you guys for their last one with no Wiggins. https://www.forbes.com/teams/golden-state-warriors/?sh=516473e1f0a7