- Jul 16, 2002
- 30,790
- 5,795
NBA 2k11play as any classic NBA team
**Official 2010 NY knicks pre-season thread** 10/6 vs T-wolves (PARIS) 2PM MSG/NBA TV
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by pr0phecy718,
- Start date
NBA 2k11play as any classic NBA team
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
If anything, Bosh is the forgotten one in that draft class.
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
If anything, Bosh is the forgotten one in that draft class.
- Jul 22, 2007
- 3,938
- 11
Damn, had no clue about the CBA. I knew a little about the state tax but I didn't know it was that big.
- Jul 22, 2007
- 3,938
- 11
Damn, had no clue about the CBA. I knew a little about the state tax but I didn't know it was that big.
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
i don't believe anything about a 30 million dollar pay cut for mello in the new CBA. Nobody has any idea what the consequences will be
and Bosh is the forgotten one? that's why the media elevated him to superstar status over the last month... making people believe that he was an instant max contract and amare is a bum who shouldn't be paid. Bosh gets far more credit than he deserves.
and Bosh is the forgotten one? that's why the media elevated him to superstar status over the last month... making people believe that he was an instant max contract and amare is a bum who shouldn't be paid. Bosh gets far more credit than he deserves.
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
i don't believe anything about a 30 million dollar pay cut for mello in the new CBA. Nobody has any idea what the consequences will be
and Bosh is the forgotten one? that's why the media elevated him to superstar status over the last month... making people believe that he was an instant max contract and amare is a bum who shouldn't be paid. Bosh gets far more credit than he deserves.
and Bosh is the forgotten one? that's why the media elevated him to superstar status over the last month... making people believe that he was an instant max contract and amare is a bum who shouldn't be paid. Bosh gets far more credit than he deserves.
- Sep 1, 2004
- 25,508
- 667
there is info on what they are trying to do to the CBA
Spoiler [+]
It's not all about this free-agent class. All we've been hearing about is the importance of the coming summer, when LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Joe Johnson will be on the market.
But a more ominous date is 2011, as owners and players look ahead to a new collective bargaining agreement that will take effect in 2011-12. Four team executives have told me they're anticipating a hard cap on payrolls, which will clamp down on player salaries and prevent big franchises like the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics from outspending teams from smaller markets.
A hard cap would transform the way teams are assembled. Look at the Lakers, whose payroll of $91.4 million has vaulted them a league-leading $33.7 million above the cap. Try this perspective: If the soft-cap system of today was instantly replaced by a hard cap, the Lakers would no longer be able to afford the salaries of Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum, who are their second- and third-most-expensive players with current salaries of $16.5 million and $12.5 million, respectively. And even their disposal wouldn't be enough: The Lakers would need to slash another $4.8 million to climb under the hard cap. (Goodbye, Luke Walton.)
If, in fact, a hard cap is installed after next season, then it will likely be preceded by a transitional system over a short number of years that will enable contenders like the Lakers to keep the likes of Gasol and Bynum without destroying their roster. After all, it would be self-defeating for the NBA to instantly deconstruct the most popular -- and expensive -- payrolls. Maybe some kind of amnesty will enable a few salaries to be grandfathered in until those preexisting contracts expire.
No one knows for sure what kind of system will result from extended negotiations and a potential lockout of the players in July 2011. Some believe (as you'll see below) that the players will avoid a hard cap, or that other more creative solutions will be applied. But let me repeat this much: I asked executives from four teams what they think they'll be dealing with after next season, and all four predicted a hard cap.
"I really think worst case it will be a hard cap that gets phased in over three years," a GM said.
By "worst case," he's implying that the players shouldn't hope for anything better than a three-year transition. Another senior executive predicts an even more draconian transformation, especially if a failure of negotiations results in a lockout. "Our players don't save money," he said, and so he predicts that a few months without income will force the players to cave in and accept the owners' demands, including an instantaneous reduction in salaries similar to the harsh transformation of the NHL, which was able to get its players to concede to a 24 percent pay cut following the season-long lockout of 2004-05.
"If there's going to be a lockout," he said, "then there's a 99 percent chance there is going to be a hard cap."
• The conversion is already beginning. GMs have been outspoken about the impact of declining league revenues, which have shrunk the salary cap and left teams like the Knicks with less room under the cap to offer free agents such as James or Wade this summer.
But that's only part of the story. As owners look ahead to the new realities of 2011-12, many may no longer be willing to use their cap space on free agents this summer. A contract that appears reasonable today may turn out to be an albatross in the new era of a hard cap.
"Teams might say, 'I don't want to give $15 million to $20 million to one guy because that might lock me out of a hard cap,' " a team executive said. "It could change everything."
James and Wade will get everything they want this summer, because each is clearly an elite player capable of leading a team to the championship. Bosh and Johnson (who are viewed on a level just below James and Wade) are likely to receive max, or near-max, contracts.
But what about the next tier of free agents, which includes Amar'e Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer and Rudy Gay? If you're a team owner who views a hard cap in 2011 as your salvation, are you going to risk an eight-figure salary on a player who isn't likely to carry your team to the championship? If a hard cap is the new reality, then everyone in the league will be taking a new view of player salaries.
"I want to be careful about calling this collusion, because that's illegal," said agent David Bauman, who represents Ron Artest and other players. "But I do think it's being strongly suggested to teams that they should not give out long-term deals because the next CBA is going to look drastically different.''
A prominent example is offered by the case of Jermaine O'Neal, who, in 2003, signed a seven-year, $127 million contract to remain with the Pacers. At that time, the 6-foot-11 O'Neal was a 25-year-old who had played in two All-Star Games and had averaged 20.8 points, 10.3 rebounds and 2.3 blocks in 2002-03. Signing him to that contract was a no-brainer at the time.
But then a new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated, and the economics changed. Now you look at O'Neal's salary -- $23 million in the final season of that contract -- and you wonder what the Pacers were thinking, especially since injuries have robbed him of his big statistical numbers.
If a team signs a player to a five-year contract this summer, four of those years will be paid under the rules of a new CBA starting in 2011-12. That's why owners will be taking the new realities into consideration as they make offers.
Predicted one GM: "In the new deal, $8 million is going to be star-player money."
• We'll see the first influences of the new reality at the trading deadline. While some teams will stay away from making long-term player investments in these uncertain times, other owners will try to exploit it. "There are still two titles to be won [before 2011-12], and certain teams will throw caution to the wind to win them," a team executive said. "If you're the Celtics, are you going to worry about your future? What you're probably going to focus on is the here and now."
That's why the Celtics made a run last month at acquiring Kirk Hinrich, who has three years (including this season) and $26.5 million left on his contract, an outlandish amount for someone who would be Boston's third guard. But he would have resolved all of Boston's backcourt issues while extending its defense, and so the Celtics considered offering spare parts for Hinrich before the Bulls decided they needed a high-quality player or draft pick in the exchange.
Two contenders in particular can be expected to be aggressive while others are receding. "I see two guys who will play heavily in this market -- [Mavericks owner Mark] Cuban and [Cavaliers owner Dan] Gilbert," a GM said.
The Cavs face the possibility of losing LeBron to free agency this summer, which is why they are aggressively pursuing a trade for Wizards power forward Antawn Jamison, a complementary All-Star-level scorer and rebounder who would space the floor for Shaquille O'Neal and make Cleveland the prohibitive favorite in the East. A package of Zydrunas Ilgauskas' expiring contract, young power forward J.J. Hickson, draft picks and $3 million might get it done, but I'm told the Cavs have been reticent -- not so much because Jamison has $40 million over three years left, but more so because they don't want to lose Ilgauskas and his ability to match up with Pau Gasol in a potential NBA Finals against the Lakers.
As for Cuban, it goes without saying that he would approach the trade deadline as an opportunity to grow while other teams are cutting back.
The expiring contracts of Tracy McGrady, Stoudemire or even Bosh might be more valuable in the current market. If the underachieving Wizards are looking to slash payroll and start anew, then a simple move would be to package Jamison and Caron Butler to Houston for McGrady and other considerations -- which would provide the Rockets with two stars while netting Washington with $22.5 million in relief when McGrady's contract expires this summer.
With so many teams offering expiring deals or highly valuable players (like Jamison, Butler or Detroit's Richard Hamilton) who have multiple years on their contracts, it will be interesting to see if the Bulls will be forced to renew negotiations with Boston in order to unload Hinrich's money at the trade deadline.
• Other options. Agent Bill Duffy is among those who believes the NBA won't be able to install a hard cap in 2011-12. "I've heard all of that [speculation]," said Duffy, who represents Yao Ming, Steve Nash and other stars. "If the league tries to go too far with this, then my prediction is the union will disband. If the league is going to try to force a hard cap down the players' throat, then they'll disband the union and file antitrust [lawsuits] against the league."
There are a number of potential solutions to what ails the league. The most creative idea I've heard is to sign players to a percentage of revenues. Let's say not only that a hard cap is installed but also that players are signed not to an outright salary, but instead to a percentage of the team's cap figure.
For example: Instead of signing Stoudemire to $8 million per year, a team would pay him 15 percent of the hard cap each season. Because the cap is based on revenues, then Stoudemire and all other players would make money based on the league's success. I like this idea because the players would be encouraged to police themselves. And, more than ever, they would realize in a highly tangible way that when Gilbert Arenas brings guns into the locker room, he hurts all of them.
Paying each player a percentage of revenues would create a new partnership between NBA players and owners. But it will also be a very hard sell because players obviously won't want to surrender their current right to long-term contracts that are guaranteed, regardless of market conditions.
One GM hopes that the new CBA will do away with max contracts.
"If we do get to a hard cap, I want to get rid of all the stupid rules, like mid-level exceptions and max salaries," he said. "Say the new max is $12 million, which means some team is getting LeBron at $12 million when he is really worth $60 million to their franchise. All that will do is tilt the playing field toward losing more than ever."
In other words, a limit on max salaries will provide further incentive for teams to improve their lottery position in order to acquire a star like James.
"The only way to get a player like LeBron is to get a top-five pick, and the only way to get that kind of pick is by losing," the GM said. "The league is only going to increase the incentive to lose games if you're prevented from paying LeBron more than $10 to $12 million. It's too big of a competitive advantage to the teams that have a player like him."
• Buyouts. "This might be one of the greatest buyout seasons ever," another GM said. "Think about your savings: You have a $10 million player, and you save $800,000 by buying him out so he can go play for a contender. That $800,000 is going to mean a lot to teams these days, especially if you're paying a luxury tax on that guy."
All of this is very fluid, and when you put it together it becomes harder than ever for franchises to choose between trying to win now while planning for the future.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated....index.html#ixzz0uict1mIi
But a more ominous date is 2011, as owners and players look ahead to a new collective bargaining agreement that will take effect in 2011-12. Four team executives have told me they're anticipating a hard cap on payrolls, which will clamp down on player salaries and prevent big franchises like the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics from outspending teams from smaller markets.
A hard cap would transform the way teams are assembled. Look at the Lakers, whose payroll of $91.4 million has vaulted them a league-leading $33.7 million above the cap. Try this perspective: If the soft-cap system of today was instantly replaced by a hard cap, the Lakers would no longer be able to afford the salaries of Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum, who are their second- and third-most-expensive players with current salaries of $16.5 million and $12.5 million, respectively. And even their disposal wouldn't be enough: The Lakers would need to slash another $4.8 million to climb under the hard cap. (Goodbye, Luke Walton.)
If, in fact, a hard cap is installed after next season, then it will likely be preceded by a transitional system over a short number of years that will enable contenders like the Lakers to keep the likes of Gasol and Bynum without destroying their roster. After all, it would be self-defeating for the NBA to instantly deconstruct the most popular -- and expensive -- payrolls. Maybe some kind of amnesty will enable a few salaries to be grandfathered in until those preexisting contracts expire.
No one knows for sure what kind of system will result from extended negotiations and a potential lockout of the players in July 2011. Some believe (as you'll see below) that the players will avoid a hard cap, or that other more creative solutions will be applied. But let me repeat this much: I asked executives from four teams what they think they'll be dealing with after next season, and all four predicted a hard cap.
"I really think worst case it will be a hard cap that gets phased in over three years," a GM said.
By "worst case," he's implying that the players shouldn't hope for anything better than a three-year transition. Another senior executive predicts an even more draconian transformation, especially if a failure of negotiations results in a lockout. "Our players don't save money," he said, and so he predicts that a few months without income will force the players to cave in and accept the owners' demands, including an instantaneous reduction in salaries similar to the harsh transformation of the NHL, which was able to get its players to concede to a 24 percent pay cut following the season-long lockout of 2004-05.
"If there's going to be a lockout," he said, "then there's a 99 percent chance there is going to be a hard cap."
• The conversion is already beginning. GMs have been outspoken about the impact of declining league revenues, which have shrunk the salary cap and left teams like the Knicks with less room under the cap to offer free agents such as James or Wade this summer.
But that's only part of the story. As owners look ahead to the new realities of 2011-12, many may no longer be willing to use their cap space on free agents this summer. A contract that appears reasonable today may turn out to be an albatross in the new era of a hard cap.
"Teams might say, 'I don't want to give $15 million to $20 million to one guy because that might lock me out of a hard cap,' " a team executive said. "It could change everything."
James and Wade will get everything they want this summer, because each is clearly an elite player capable of leading a team to the championship. Bosh and Johnson (who are viewed on a level just below James and Wade) are likely to receive max, or near-max, contracts.
But what about the next tier of free agents, which includes Amar'e Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer and Rudy Gay? If you're a team owner who views a hard cap in 2011 as your salvation, are you going to risk an eight-figure salary on a player who isn't likely to carry your team to the championship? If a hard cap is the new reality, then everyone in the league will be taking a new view of player salaries.
"I want to be careful about calling this collusion, because that's illegal," said agent David Bauman, who represents Ron Artest and other players. "But I do think it's being strongly suggested to teams that they should not give out long-term deals because the next CBA is going to look drastically different.''
A prominent example is offered by the case of Jermaine O'Neal, who, in 2003, signed a seven-year, $127 million contract to remain with the Pacers. At that time, the 6-foot-11 O'Neal was a 25-year-old who had played in two All-Star Games and had averaged 20.8 points, 10.3 rebounds and 2.3 blocks in 2002-03. Signing him to that contract was a no-brainer at the time.
But then a new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated, and the economics changed. Now you look at O'Neal's salary -- $23 million in the final season of that contract -- and you wonder what the Pacers were thinking, especially since injuries have robbed him of his big statistical numbers.
If a team signs a player to a five-year contract this summer, four of those years will be paid under the rules of a new CBA starting in 2011-12. That's why owners will be taking the new realities into consideration as they make offers.
Predicted one GM: "In the new deal, $8 million is going to be star-player money."
• We'll see the first influences of the new reality at the trading deadline. While some teams will stay away from making long-term player investments in these uncertain times, other owners will try to exploit it. "There are still two titles to be won [before 2011-12], and certain teams will throw caution to the wind to win them," a team executive said. "If you're the Celtics, are you going to worry about your future? What you're probably going to focus on is the here and now."
That's why the Celtics made a run last month at acquiring Kirk Hinrich, who has three years (including this season) and $26.5 million left on his contract, an outlandish amount for someone who would be Boston's third guard. But he would have resolved all of Boston's backcourt issues while extending its defense, and so the Celtics considered offering spare parts for Hinrich before the Bulls decided they needed a high-quality player or draft pick in the exchange.
Two contenders in particular can be expected to be aggressive while others are receding. "I see two guys who will play heavily in this market -- [Mavericks owner Mark] Cuban and [Cavaliers owner Dan] Gilbert," a GM said.
The Cavs face the possibility of losing LeBron to free agency this summer, which is why they are aggressively pursuing a trade for Wizards power forward Antawn Jamison, a complementary All-Star-level scorer and rebounder who would space the floor for Shaquille O'Neal and make Cleveland the prohibitive favorite in the East. A package of Zydrunas Ilgauskas' expiring contract, young power forward J.J. Hickson, draft picks and $3 million might get it done, but I'm told the Cavs have been reticent -- not so much because Jamison has $40 million over three years left, but more so because they don't want to lose Ilgauskas and his ability to match up with Pau Gasol in a potential NBA Finals against the Lakers.
As for Cuban, it goes without saying that he would approach the trade deadline as an opportunity to grow while other teams are cutting back.
The expiring contracts of Tracy McGrady, Stoudemire or even Bosh might be more valuable in the current market. If the underachieving Wizards are looking to slash payroll and start anew, then a simple move would be to package Jamison and Caron Butler to Houston for McGrady and other considerations -- which would provide the Rockets with two stars while netting Washington with $22.5 million in relief when McGrady's contract expires this summer.
With so many teams offering expiring deals or highly valuable players (like Jamison, Butler or Detroit's Richard Hamilton) who have multiple years on their contracts, it will be interesting to see if the Bulls will be forced to renew negotiations with Boston in order to unload Hinrich's money at the trade deadline.
• Other options. Agent Bill Duffy is among those who believes the NBA won't be able to install a hard cap in 2011-12. "I've heard all of that [speculation]," said Duffy, who represents Yao Ming, Steve Nash and other stars. "If the league tries to go too far with this, then my prediction is the union will disband. If the league is going to try to force a hard cap down the players' throat, then they'll disband the union and file antitrust [lawsuits] against the league."
There are a number of potential solutions to what ails the league. The most creative idea I've heard is to sign players to a percentage of revenues. Let's say not only that a hard cap is installed but also that players are signed not to an outright salary, but instead to a percentage of the team's cap figure.
For example: Instead of signing Stoudemire to $8 million per year, a team would pay him 15 percent of the hard cap each season. Because the cap is based on revenues, then Stoudemire and all other players would make money based on the league's success. I like this idea because the players would be encouraged to police themselves. And, more than ever, they would realize in a highly tangible way that when Gilbert Arenas brings guns into the locker room, he hurts all of them.
Paying each player a percentage of revenues would create a new partnership between NBA players and owners. But it will also be a very hard sell because players obviously won't want to surrender their current right to long-term contracts that are guaranteed, regardless of market conditions.
One GM hopes that the new CBA will do away with max contracts.
"If we do get to a hard cap, I want to get rid of all the stupid rules, like mid-level exceptions and max salaries," he said. "Say the new max is $12 million, which means some team is getting LeBron at $12 million when he is really worth $60 million to their franchise. All that will do is tilt the playing field toward losing more than ever."
In other words, a limit on max salaries will provide further incentive for teams to improve their lottery position in order to acquire a star like James.
"The only way to get a player like LeBron is to get a top-five pick, and the only way to get that kind of pick is by losing," the GM said. "The league is only going to increase the incentive to lose games if you're prevented from paying LeBron more than $10 to $12 million. It's too big of a competitive advantage to the teams that have a player like him."
• Buyouts. "This might be one of the greatest buyout seasons ever," another GM said. "Think about your savings: You have a $10 million player, and you save $800,000 by buying him out so he can go play for a contender. That $800,000 is going to mean a lot to teams these days, especially if you're paying a luxury tax on that guy."
All of this is very fluid, and when you put it together it becomes harder than ever for franchises to choose between trying to win now while planning for the future.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated....index.html#ixzz0uict1mIi
Spoiler [+]
NEW YORK-- Launching a grim opening salvo in what is expected to be a contentious labor negotiation, NBA owners have sent their initial proposal to the players association and are pushing for some elements of a "hard" salary cap as well as a drastic reduction in player salaries, CBSSports.com has learned.
The proposal, sent to the union earlier this week, seeks a reduction in the players' share of basketball-related income from 57 percent to well below 50 percent, according to a person familiar with the document. Owners also are seeking some elements of a hard cap -- a departure from the current luxury-tax system -- and a reduction in the length and amount of max contracts.
Owners and players will meet in Dallas during All-Star weekend for their first face-to-face bargaining session as they try to reach an agreement before the current deal expires in 2011. The talks coincide with the NFL's labor negotiation, in which owners have proposed an 18 percent pay cut for players.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the players association, did not return calls seeking comment on the proposal, which is sure to set a serious tone in talks aimed at averting the league's first lockout since the 1998-99 season. NBA spokesman Tim Frank said league officials would have no comment.
Owners are seeking significant changes to the league's financial structure as many of them face massive losses in the wake of the global economic crisis. In addition to lowering the players' overall share of basketball-related income (BRI), owners are pushing for some elements of a hard cap to replace the current luxury tax system, in which teams with payrolls above the tax line subsidize those staying below the limit, which was set at $69.9 million this season.
But players already are facing a reduction in salaries next season, when the cap is expected to decline from the current level of $57.7 million to between $50 million and $54 million. Most team executives working on financial projections for next season are predicting a $52 million cap.
Union president Derek Fisher, speaking Sunday before the Lakers played the Celtics in Boston, predicted that the owners would "overreach" with their initial proposal and said the players would strongly oppose a dramatic reduction their share of BRI.
One prominent player agent, speaking to CBSSports.com about the impending labor talks, called a hard cap "untenable," but said the owners' financial losses a similar request for pay cuts by NFL owners create a double-whammy of leverage.
"The players will talk tough, but I'm not sure they have a whole lot to hang their hat on," the agent said. "If the NFL is cutting salaries, I think you can expect something similar in the NBA."
If the owners succeed in implementing some version of a hard cap, management sources predict it would drive player salaries down precipitously. The players likely will argue that the luxury tax system is working as a payroll impediment. Only a handful of the highest-revenue teams pay luxury tax in a given year, and a flurry of trades prior to the Feb. 18 deadline will illustrate the union's point. The majority of trades that will be consummated will be driven by teams trying to pare salary to avoid clipping the luxury tax line.
"An NFL-style hard cap is going to blow the minimum-salary and mid-level players completely out of the water," one person familiar with the owners' proposal said. "In any hard-cap system, the owners are going to pay the stars. If there are no exceptions and no ways to exceed the cap, everybody else is going to be left with the scraps."
Perhaps that is why the owners want to go farther than changing the rules; they want the league's highest-paid players to take a haircut, as well. Owners are seeking to reduce the maximum length of contracts to five years for players re-signing with their current teams and to four years for players signing with new teams. Under the current collective bargaining agreement, in effect since 2005, players re-signing with their current teams can be under contract for a maximum of six years. Other free agents can sign for a maximum of five. This would be a way to avoid star players' salaries remaining high while the second- and third-tier players bear the brunt of the overall payroll reduction.
As CBSSports.com reported Jan. 29, a segment of ownership believes that reducing the length and amount of max contracts would wipe out the owners' collective financial losses by itself. But by pushing for a significant reduction in maximum salaries, the owners would be alienating the players who produce the vast majority of revenue for their teams; fans pay to see LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, not Daniel Gibson and Dorell Wright.
“If they don’t like the new max contracts, LeBron can play football, where he will make less than the new max,
The proposal, sent to the union earlier this week, seeks a reduction in the players' share of basketball-related income from 57 percent to well below 50 percent, according to a person familiar with the document. Owners also are seeking some elements of a hard cap -- a departure from the current luxury-tax system -- and a reduction in the length and amount of max contracts.
Owners and players will meet in Dallas during All-Star weekend for their first face-to-face bargaining session as they try to reach an agreement before the current deal expires in 2011. The talks coincide with the NFL's labor negotiation, in which owners have proposed an 18 percent pay cut for players.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the players association, did not return calls seeking comment on the proposal, which is sure to set a serious tone in talks aimed at averting the league's first lockout since the 1998-99 season. NBA spokesman Tim Frank said league officials would have no comment.
Owners are seeking significant changes to the league's financial structure as many of them face massive losses in the wake of the global economic crisis. In addition to lowering the players' overall share of basketball-related income (BRI), owners are pushing for some elements of a hard cap to replace the current luxury tax system, in which teams with payrolls above the tax line subsidize those staying below the limit, which was set at $69.9 million this season.
But players already are facing a reduction in salaries next season, when the cap is expected to decline from the current level of $57.7 million to between $50 million and $54 million. Most team executives working on financial projections for next season are predicting a $52 million cap.
Union president Derek Fisher, speaking Sunday before the Lakers played the Celtics in Boston, predicted that the owners would "overreach" with their initial proposal and said the players would strongly oppose a dramatic reduction their share of BRI.
One prominent player agent, speaking to CBSSports.com about the impending labor talks, called a hard cap "untenable," but said the owners' financial losses a similar request for pay cuts by NFL owners create a double-whammy of leverage.
"The players will talk tough, but I'm not sure they have a whole lot to hang their hat on," the agent said. "If the NFL is cutting salaries, I think you can expect something similar in the NBA."
If the owners succeed in implementing some version of a hard cap, management sources predict it would drive player salaries down precipitously. The players likely will argue that the luxury tax system is working as a payroll impediment. Only a handful of the highest-revenue teams pay luxury tax in a given year, and a flurry of trades prior to the Feb. 18 deadline will illustrate the union's point. The majority of trades that will be consummated will be driven by teams trying to pare salary to avoid clipping the luxury tax line.
"An NFL-style hard cap is going to blow the minimum-salary and mid-level players completely out of the water," one person familiar with the owners' proposal said. "In any hard-cap system, the owners are going to pay the stars. If there are no exceptions and no ways to exceed the cap, everybody else is going to be left with the scraps."
Perhaps that is why the owners want to go farther than changing the rules; they want the league's highest-paid players to take a haircut, as well. Owners are seeking to reduce the maximum length of contracts to five years for players re-signing with their current teams and to four years for players signing with new teams. Under the current collective bargaining agreement, in effect since 2005, players re-signing with their current teams can be under contract for a maximum of six years. Other free agents can sign for a maximum of five. This would be a way to avoid star players' salaries remaining high while the second- and third-tier players bear the brunt of the overall payroll reduction.
As CBSSports.com reported Jan. 29, a segment of ownership believes that reducing the length and amount of max contracts would wipe out the owners' collective financial losses by itself. But by pushing for a significant reduction in maximum salaries, the owners would be alienating the players who produce the vast majority of revenue for their teams; fans pay to see LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, not Daniel Gibson and Dorell Wright.
“If they don’t like the new max contracts, LeBron can play football, where he will make less than the new max,
- Sep 1, 2004
- 25,508
- 667
there is info on what they are trying to do to the CBA
Spoiler [+]
It's not all about this free-agent class. All we've been hearing about is the importance of the coming summer, when LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Joe Johnson will be on the market.
But a more ominous date is 2011, as owners and players look ahead to a new collective bargaining agreement that will take effect in 2011-12. Four team executives have told me they're anticipating a hard cap on payrolls, which will clamp down on player salaries and prevent big franchises like the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics from outspending teams from smaller markets.
A hard cap would transform the way teams are assembled. Look at the Lakers, whose payroll of $91.4 million has vaulted them a league-leading $33.7 million above the cap. Try this perspective: If the soft-cap system of today was instantly replaced by a hard cap, the Lakers would no longer be able to afford the salaries of Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum, who are their second- and third-most-expensive players with current salaries of $16.5 million and $12.5 million, respectively. And even their disposal wouldn't be enough: The Lakers would need to slash another $4.8 million to climb under the hard cap. (Goodbye, Luke Walton.)
If, in fact, a hard cap is installed after next season, then it will likely be preceded by a transitional system over a short number of years that will enable contenders like the Lakers to keep the likes of Gasol and Bynum without destroying their roster. After all, it would be self-defeating for the NBA to instantly deconstruct the most popular -- and expensive -- payrolls. Maybe some kind of amnesty will enable a few salaries to be grandfathered in until those preexisting contracts expire.
No one knows for sure what kind of system will result from extended negotiations and a potential lockout of the players in July 2011. Some believe (as you'll see below) that the players will avoid a hard cap, or that other more creative solutions will be applied. But let me repeat this much: I asked executives from four teams what they think they'll be dealing with after next season, and all four predicted a hard cap.
"I really think worst case it will be a hard cap that gets phased in over three years," a GM said.
By "worst case," he's implying that the players shouldn't hope for anything better than a three-year transition. Another senior executive predicts an even more draconian transformation, especially if a failure of negotiations results in a lockout. "Our players don't save money," he said, and so he predicts that a few months without income will force the players to cave in and accept the owners' demands, including an instantaneous reduction in salaries similar to the harsh transformation of the NHL, which was able to get its players to concede to a 24 percent pay cut following the season-long lockout of 2004-05.
"If there's going to be a lockout," he said, "then there's a 99 percent chance there is going to be a hard cap."
• The conversion is already beginning. GMs have been outspoken about the impact of declining league revenues, which have shrunk the salary cap and left teams like the Knicks with less room under the cap to offer free agents such as James or Wade this summer.
But that's only part of the story. As owners look ahead to the new realities of 2011-12, many may no longer be willing to use their cap space on free agents this summer. A contract that appears reasonable today may turn out to be an albatross in the new era of a hard cap.
"Teams might say, 'I don't want to give $15 million to $20 million to one guy because that might lock me out of a hard cap,' " a team executive said. "It could change everything."
James and Wade will get everything they want this summer, because each is clearly an elite player capable of leading a team to the championship. Bosh and Johnson (who are viewed on a level just below James and Wade) are likely to receive max, or near-max, contracts.
But what about the next tier of free agents, which includes Amar'e Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer and Rudy Gay? If you're a team owner who views a hard cap in 2011 as your salvation, are you going to risk an eight-figure salary on a player who isn't likely to carry your team to the championship? If a hard cap is the new reality, then everyone in the league will be taking a new view of player salaries.
"I want to be careful about calling this collusion, because that's illegal," said agent David Bauman, who represents Ron Artest and other players. "But I do think it's being strongly suggested to teams that they should not give out long-term deals because the next CBA is going to look drastically different.''
A prominent example is offered by the case of Jermaine O'Neal, who, in 2003, signed a seven-year, $127 million contract to remain with the Pacers. At that time, the 6-foot-11 O'Neal was a 25-year-old who had played in two All-Star Games and had averaged 20.8 points, 10.3 rebounds and 2.3 blocks in 2002-03. Signing him to that contract was a no-brainer at the time.
But then a new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated, and the economics changed. Now you look at O'Neal's salary -- $23 million in the final season of that contract -- and you wonder what the Pacers were thinking, especially since injuries have robbed him of his big statistical numbers.
If a team signs a player to a five-year contract this summer, four of those years will be paid under the rules of a new CBA starting in 2011-12. That's why owners will be taking the new realities into consideration as they make offers.
Predicted one GM: "In the new deal, $8 million is going to be star-player money."
• We'll see the first influences of the new reality at the trading deadline. While some teams will stay away from making long-term player investments in these uncertain times, other owners will try to exploit it. "There are still two titles to be won [before 2011-12], and certain teams will throw caution to the wind to win them," a team executive said. "If you're the Celtics, are you going to worry about your future? What you're probably going to focus on is the here and now."
That's why the Celtics made a run last month at acquiring Kirk Hinrich, who has three years (including this season) and $26.5 million left on his contract, an outlandish amount for someone who would be Boston's third guard. But he would have resolved all of Boston's backcourt issues while extending its defense, and so the Celtics considered offering spare parts for Hinrich before the Bulls decided they needed a high-quality player or draft pick in the exchange.
Two contenders in particular can be expected to be aggressive while others are receding. "I see two guys who will play heavily in this market -- [Mavericks owner Mark] Cuban and [Cavaliers owner Dan] Gilbert," a GM said.
The Cavs face the possibility of losing LeBron to free agency this summer, which is why they are aggressively pursuing a trade for Wizards power forward Antawn Jamison, a complementary All-Star-level scorer and rebounder who would space the floor for Shaquille O'Neal and make Cleveland the prohibitive favorite in the East. A package of Zydrunas Ilgauskas' expiring contract, young power forward J.J. Hickson, draft picks and $3 million might get it done, but I'm told the Cavs have been reticent -- not so much because Jamison has $40 million over three years left, but more so because they don't want to lose Ilgauskas and his ability to match up with Pau Gasol in a potential NBA Finals against the Lakers.
As for Cuban, it goes without saying that he would approach the trade deadline as an opportunity to grow while other teams are cutting back.
The expiring contracts of Tracy McGrady, Stoudemire or even Bosh might be more valuable in the current market. If the underachieving Wizards are looking to slash payroll and start anew, then a simple move would be to package Jamison and Caron Butler to Houston for McGrady and other considerations -- which would provide the Rockets with two stars while netting Washington with $22.5 million in relief when McGrady's contract expires this summer.
With so many teams offering expiring deals or highly valuable players (like Jamison, Butler or Detroit's Richard Hamilton) who have multiple years on their contracts, it will be interesting to see if the Bulls will be forced to renew negotiations with Boston in order to unload Hinrich's money at the trade deadline.
• Other options. Agent Bill Duffy is among those who believes the NBA won't be able to install a hard cap in 2011-12. "I've heard all of that [speculation]," said Duffy, who represents Yao Ming, Steve Nash and other stars. "If the league tries to go too far with this, then my prediction is the union will disband. If the league is going to try to force a hard cap down the players' throat, then they'll disband the union and file antitrust [lawsuits] against the league."
There are a number of potential solutions to what ails the league. The most creative idea I've heard is to sign players to a percentage of revenues. Let's say not only that a hard cap is installed but also that players are signed not to an outright salary, but instead to a percentage of the team's cap figure.
For example: Instead of signing Stoudemire to $8 million per year, a team would pay him 15 percent of the hard cap each season. Because the cap is based on revenues, then Stoudemire and all other players would make money based on the league's success. I like this idea because the players would be encouraged to police themselves. And, more than ever, they would realize in a highly tangible way that when Gilbert Arenas brings guns into the locker room, he hurts all of them.
Paying each player a percentage of revenues would create a new partnership between NBA players and owners. But it will also be a very hard sell because players obviously won't want to surrender their current right to long-term contracts that are guaranteed, regardless of market conditions.
One GM hopes that the new CBA will do away with max contracts.
"If we do get to a hard cap, I want to get rid of all the stupid rules, like mid-level exceptions and max salaries," he said. "Say the new max is $12 million, which means some team is getting LeBron at $12 million when he is really worth $60 million to their franchise. All that will do is tilt the playing field toward losing more than ever."
In other words, a limit on max salaries will provide further incentive for teams to improve their lottery position in order to acquire a star like James.
"The only way to get a player like LeBron is to get a top-five pick, and the only way to get that kind of pick is by losing," the GM said. "The league is only going to increase the incentive to lose games if you're prevented from paying LeBron more than $10 to $12 million. It's too big of a competitive advantage to the teams that have a player like him."
• Buyouts. "This might be one of the greatest buyout seasons ever," another GM said. "Think about your savings: You have a $10 million player, and you save $800,000 by buying him out so he can go play for a contender. That $800,000 is going to mean a lot to teams these days, especially if you're paying a luxury tax on that guy."
All of this is very fluid, and when you put it together it becomes harder than ever for franchises to choose between trying to win now while planning for the future.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated....index.html#ixzz0uict1mIi
But a more ominous date is 2011, as owners and players look ahead to a new collective bargaining agreement that will take effect in 2011-12. Four team executives have told me they're anticipating a hard cap on payrolls, which will clamp down on player salaries and prevent big franchises like the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics from outspending teams from smaller markets.
A hard cap would transform the way teams are assembled. Look at the Lakers, whose payroll of $91.4 million has vaulted them a league-leading $33.7 million above the cap. Try this perspective: If the soft-cap system of today was instantly replaced by a hard cap, the Lakers would no longer be able to afford the salaries of Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum, who are their second- and third-most-expensive players with current salaries of $16.5 million and $12.5 million, respectively. And even their disposal wouldn't be enough: The Lakers would need to slash another $4.8 million to climb under the hard cap. (Goodbye, Luke Walton.)
If, in fact, a hard cap is installed after next season, then it will likely be preceded by a transitional system over a short number of years that will enable contenders like the Lakers to keep the likes of Gasol and Bynum without destroying their roster. After all, it would be self-defeating for the NBA to instantly deconstruct the most popular -- and expensive -- payrolls. Maybe some kind of amnesty will enable a few salaries to be grandfathered in until those preexisting contracts expire.
No one knows for sure what kind of system will result from extended negotiations and a potential lockout of the players in July 2011. Some believe (as you'll see below) that the players will avoid a hard cap, or that other more creative solutions will be applied. But let me repeat this much: I asked executives from four teams what they think they'll be dealing with after next season, and all four predicted a hard cap.
"I really think worst case it will be a hard cap that gets phased in over three years," a GM said.
By "worst case," he's implying that the players shouldn't hope for anything better than a three-year transition. Another senior executive predicts an even more draconian transformation, especially if a failure of negotiations results in a lockout. "Our players don't save money," he said, and so he predicts that a few months without income will force the players to cave in and accept the owners' demands, including an instantaneous reduction in salaries similar to the harsh transformation of the NHL, which was able to get its players to concede to a 24 percent pay cut following the season-long lockout of 2004-05.
"If there's going to be a lockout," he said, "then there's a 99 percent chance there is going to be a hard cap."
• The conversion is already beginning. GMs have been outspoken about the impact of declining league revenues, which have shrunk the salary cap and left teams like the Knicks with less room under the cap to offer free agents such as James or Wade this summer.
But that's only part of the story. As owners look ahead to the new realities of 2011-12, many may no longer be willing to use their cap space on free agents this summer. A contract that appears reasonable today may turn out to be an albatross in the new era of a hard cap.
"Teams might say, 'I don't want to give $15 million to $20 million to one guy because that might lock me out of a hard cap,' " a team executive said. "It could change everything."
James and Wade will get everything they want this summer, because each is clearly an elite player capable of leading a team to the championship. Bosh and Johnson (who are viewed on a level just below James and Wade) are likely to receive max, or near-max, contracts.
But what about the next tier of free agents, which includes Amar'e Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer and Rudy Gay? If you're a team owner who views a hard cap in 2011 as your salvation, are you going to risk an eight-figure salary on a player who isn't likely to carry your team to the championship? If a hard cap is the new reality, then everyone in the league will be taking a new view of player salaries.
"I want to be careful about calling this collusion, because that's illegal," said agent David Bauman, who represents Ron Artest and other players. "But I do think it's being strongly suggested to teams that they should not give out long-term deals because the next CBA is going to look drastically different.''
A prominent example is offered by the case of Jermaine O'Neal, who, in 2003, signed a seven-year, $127 million contract to remain with the Pacers. At that time, the 6-foot-11 O'Neal was a 25-year-old who had played in two All-Star Games and had averaged 20.8 points, 10.3 rebounds and 2.3 blocks in 2002-03. Signing him to that contract was a no-brainer at the time.
But then a new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated, and the economics changed. Now you look at O'Neal's salary -- $23 million in the final season of that contract -- and you wonder what the Pacers were thinking, especially since injuries have robbed him of his big statistical numbers.
If a team signs a player to a five-year contract this summer, four of those years will be paid under the rules of a new CBA starting in 2011-12. That's why owners will be taking the new realities into consideration as they make offers.
Predicted one GM: "In the new deal, $8 million is going to be star-player money."
• We'll see the first influences of the new reality at the trading deadline. While some teams will stay away from making long-term player investments in these uncertain times, other owners will try to exploit it. "There are still two titles to be won [before 2011-12], and certain teams will throw caution to the wind to win them," a team executive said. "If you're the Celtics, are you going to worry about your future? What you're probably going to focus on is the here and now."
That's why the Celtics made a run last month at acquiring Kirk Hinrich, who has three years (including this season) and $26.5 million left on his contract, an outlandish amount for someone who would be Boston's third guard. But he would have resolved all of Boston's backcourt issues while extending its defense, and so the Celtics considered offering spare parts for Hinrich before the Bulls decided they needed a high-quality player or draft pick in the exchange.
Two contenders in particular can be expected to be aggressive while others are receding. "I see two guys who will play heavily in this market -- [Mavericks owner Mark] Cuban and [Cavaliers owner Dan] Gilbert," a GM said.
The Cavs face the possibility of losing LeBron to free agency this summer, which is why they are aggressively pursuing a trade for Wizards power forward Antawn Jamison, a complementary All-Star-level scorer and rebounder who would space the floor for Shaquille O'Neal and make Cleveland the prohibitive favorite in the East. A package of Zydrunas Ilgauskas' expiring contract, young power forward J.J. Hickson, draft picks and $3 million might get it done, but I'm told the Cavs have been reticent -- not so much because Jamison has $40 million over three years left, but more so because they don't want to lose Ilgauskas and his ability to match up with Pau Gasol in a potential NBA Finals against the Lakers.
As for Cuban, it goes without saying that he would approach the trade deadline as an opportunity to grow while other teams are cutting back.
The expiring contracts of Tracy McGrady, Stoudemire or even Bosh might be more valuable in the current market. If the underachieving Wizards are looking to slash payroll and start anew, then a simple move would be to package Jamison and Caron Butler to Houston for McGrady and other considerations -- which would provide the Rockets with two stars while netting Washington with $22.5 million in relief when McGrady's contract expires this summer.
With so many teams offering expiring deals or highly valuable players (like Jamison, Butler or Detroit's Richard Hamilton) who have multiple years on their contracts, it will be interesting to see if the Bulls will be forced to renew negotiations with Boston in order to unload Hinrich's money at the trade deadline.
• Other options. Agent Bill Duffy is among those who believes the NBA won't be able to install a hard cap in 2011-12. "I've heard all of that [speculation]," said Duffy, who represents Yao Ming, Steve Nash and other stars. "If the league tries to go too far with this, then my prediction is the union will disband. If the league is going to try to force a hard cap down the players' throat, then they'll disband the union and file antitrust [lawsuits] against the league."
There are a number of potential solutions to what ails the league. The most creative idea I've heard is to sign players to a percentage of revenues. Let's say not only that a hard cap is installed but also that players are signed not to an outright salary, but instead to a percentage of the team's cap figure.
For example: Instead of signing Stoudemire to $8 million per year, a team would pay him 15 percent of the hard cap each season. Because the cap is based on revenues, then Stoudemire and all other players would make money based on the league's success. I like this idea because the players would be encouraged to police themselves. And, more than ever, they would realize in a highly tangible way that when Gilbert Arenas brings guns into the locker room, he hurts all of them.
Paying each player a percentage of revenues would create a new partnership between NBA players and owners. But it will also be a very hard sell because players obviously won't want to surrender their current right to long-term contracts that are guaranteed, regardless of market conditions.
One GM hopes that the new CBA will do away with max contracts.
"If we do get to a hard cap, I want to get rid of all the stupid rules, like mid-level exceptions and max salaries," he said. "Say the new max is $12 million, which means some team is getting LeBron at $12 million when he is really worth $60 million to their franchise. All that will do is tilt the playing field toward losing more than ever."
In other words, a limit on max salaries will provide further incentive for teams to improve their lottery position in order to acquire a star like James.
"The only way to get a player like LeBron is to get a top-five pick, and the only way to get that kind of pick is by losing," the GM said. "The league is only going to increase the incentive to lose games if you're prevented from paying LeBron more than $10 to $12 million. It's too big of a competitive advantage to the teams that have a player like him."
• Buyouts. "This might be one of the greatest buyout seasons ever," another GM said. "Think about your savings: You have a $10 million player, and you save $800,000 by buying him out so he can go play for a contender. That $800,000 is going to mean a lot to teams these days, especially if you're paying a luxury tax on that guy."
All of this is very fluid, and when you put it together it becomes harder than ever for franchises to choose between trying to win now while planning for the future.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated....index.html#ixzz0uict1mIi
Spoiler [+]
NEW YORK-- Launching a grim opening salvo in what is expected to be a contentious labor negotiation, NBA owners have sent their initial proposal to the players association and are pushing for some elements of a "hard" salary cap as well as a drastic reduction in player salaries, CBSSports.com has learned.
The proposal, sent to the union earlier this week, seeks a reduction in the players' share of basketball-related income from 57 percent to well below 50 percent, according to a person familiar with the document. Owners also are seeking some elements of a hard cap -- a departure from the current luxury-tax system -- and a reduction in the length and amount of max contracts.
Owners and players will meet in Dallas during All-Star weekend for their first face-to-face bargaining session as they try to reach an agreement before the current deal expires in 2011. The talks coincide with the NFL's labor negotiation, in which owners have proposed an 18 percent pay cut for players.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the players association, did not return calls seeking comment on the proposal, which is sure to set a serious tone in talks aimed at averting the league's first lockout since the 1998-99 season. NBA spokesman Tim Frank said league officials would have no comment.
Owners are seeking significant changes to the league's financial structure as many of them face massive losses in the wake of the global economic crisis. In addition to lowering the players' overall share of basketball-related income (BRI), owners are pushing for some elements of a hard cap to replace the current luxury tax system, in which teams with payrolls above the tax line subsidize those staying below the limit, which was set at $69.9 million this season.
But players already are facing a reduction in salaries next season, when the cap is expected to decline from the current level of $57.7 million to between $50 million and $54 million. Most team executives working on financial projections for next season are predicting a $52 million cap.
Union president Derek Fisher, speaking Sunday before the Lakers played the Celtics in Boston, predicted that the owners would "overreach" with their initial proposal and said the players would strongly oppose a dramatic reduction their share of BRI.
One prominent player agent, speaking to CBSSports.com about the impending labor talks, called a hard cap "untenable," but said the owners' financial losses a similar request for pay cuts by NFL owners create a double-whammy of leverage.
"The players will talk tough, but I'm not sure they have a whole lot to hang their hat on," the agent said. "If the NFL is cutting salaries, I think you can expect something similar in the NBA."
If the owners succeed in implementing some version of a hard cap, management sources predict it would drive player salaries down precipitously. The players likely will argue that the luxury tax system is working as a payroll impediment. Only a handful of the highest-revenue teams pay luxury tax in a given year, and a flurry of trades prior to the Feb. 18 deadline will illustrate the union's point. The majority of trades that will be consummated will be driven by teams trying to pare salary to avoid clipping the luxury tax line.
"An NFL-style hard cap is going to blow the minimum-salary and mid-level players completely out of the water," one person familiar with the owners' proposal said. "In any hard-cap system, the owners are going to pay the stars. If there are no exceptions and no ways to exceed the cap, everybody else is going to be left with the scraps."
Perhaps that is why the owners want to go farther than changing the rules; they want the league's highest-paid players to take a haircut, as well. Owners are seeking to reduce the maximum length of contracts to five years for players re-signing with their current teams and to four years for players signing with new teams. Under the current collective bargaining agreement, in effect since 2005, players re-signing with their current teams can be under contract for a maximum of six years. Other free agents can sign for a maximum of five. This would be a way to avoid star players' salaries remaining high while the second- and third-tier players bear the brunt of the overall payroll reduction.
As CBSSports.com reported Jan. 29, a segment of ownership believes that reducing the length and amount of max contracts would wipe out the owners' collective financial losses by itself. But by pushing for a significant reduction in maximum salaries, the owners would be alienating the players who produce the vast majority of revenue for their teams; fans pay to see LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, not Daniel Gibson and Dorell Wright.
“If they don’t like the new max contracts, LeBron can play football, where he will make less than the new max,
The proposal, sent to the union earlier this week, seeks a reduction in the players' share of basketball-related income from 57 percent to well below 50 percent, according to a person familiar with the document. Owners also are seeking some elements of a hard cap -- a departure from the current luxury-tax system -- and a reduction in the length and amount of max contracts.
Owners and players will meet in Dallas during All-Star weekend for their first face-to-face bargaining session as they try to reach an agreement before the current deal expires in 2011. The talks coincide with the NFL's labor negotiation, in which owners have proposed an 18 percent pay cut for players.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the players association, did not return calls seeking comment on the proposal, which is sure to set a serious tone in talks aimed at averting the league's first lockout since the 1998-99 season. NBA spokesman Tim Frank said league officials would have no comment.
Owners are seeking significant changes to the league's financial structure as many of them face massive losses in the wake of the global economic crisis. In addition to lowering the players' overall share of basketball-related income (BRI), owners are pushing for some elements of a hard cap to replace the current luxury tax system, in which teams with payrolls above the tax line subsidize those staying below the limit, which was set at $69.9 million this season.
But players already are facing a reduction in salaries next season, when the cap is expected to decline from the current level of $57.7 million to between $50 million and $54 million. Most team executives working on financial projections for next season are predicting a $52 million cap.
Union president Derek Fisher, speaking Sunday before the Lakers played the Celtics in Boston, predicted that the owners would "overreach" with their initial proposal and said the players would strongly oppose a dramatic reduction their share of BRI.
One prominent player agent, speaking to CBSSports.com about the impending labor talks, called a hard cap "untenable," but said the owners' financial losses a similar request for pay cuts by NFL owners create a double-whammy of leverage.
"The players will talk tough, but I'm not sure they have a whole lot to hang their hat on," the agent said. "If the NFL is cutting salaries, I think you can expect something similar in the NBA."
If the owners succeed in implementing some version of a hard cap, management sources predict it would drive player salaries down precipitously. The players likely will argue that the luxury tax system is working as a payroll impediment. Only a handful of the highest-revenue teams pay luxury tax in a given year, and a flurry of trades prior to the Feb. 18 deadline will illustrate the union's point. The majority of trades that will be consummated will be driven by teams trying to pare salary to avoid clipping the luxury tax line.
"An NFL-style hard cap is going to blow the minimum-salary and mid-level players completely out of the water," one person familiar with the owners' proposal said. "In any hard-cap system, the owners are going to pay the stars. If there are no exceptions and no ways to exceed the cap, everybody else is going to be left with the scraps."
Perhaps that is why the owners want to go farther than changing the rules; they want the league's highest-paid players to take a haircut, as well. Owners are seeking to reduce the maximum length of contracts to five years for players re-signing with their current teams and to four years for players signing with new teams. Under the current collective bargaining agreement, in effect since 2005, players re-signing with their current teams can be under contract for a maximum of six years. Other free agents can sign for a maximum of five. This would be a way to avoid star players' salaries remaining high while the second- and third-tier players bear the brunt of the overall payroll reduction.
As CBSSports.com reported Jan. 29, a segment of ownership believes that reducing the length and amount of max contracts would wipe out the owners' collective financial losses by itself. But by pushing for a significant reduction in maximum salaries, the owners would be alienating the players who produce the vast majority of revenue for their teams; fans pay to see LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, not Daniel Gibson and Dorell Wright.
“If they don’t like the new max contracts, LeBron can play football, where he will make less than the new max,
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
For once, Mike doesnt post anything offensive towards anyone
Thanks for posting those articles though. Like i said, the ball isnt in Melo's hands right now...
Thanks for posting those articles though. Like i said, the ball isnt in Melo's hands right now...
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
For once, Mike doesnt post anything offensive towards anyone
Thanks for posting those articles though. Like i said, the ball isnt in Melo's hands right now...
Thanks for posting those articles though. Like i said, the ball isnt in Melo's hands right now...
live boy d
Banned
- May 3, 2010
- 2,522
- 10
[h2][/h2]
[h2]Vince Carter: The Expiring Contract That Isn't [/h2]
by Ben Q Rock on Jul 25, 2010 8:00 AM EDT in News
10 comments
More photos » Phelan Ebenhack - AP
Browse more photos »
In several places around this site, members of the Orlando Pinstriped Post community have written that Orlando Magic guard Vince Carter has an expiring contract, which makes him a desirable trade chip as NBA teams look to cut costs before the next collective bargaining agreement arrives sometime next year, potentially after a lengthy lockout. For clarification's sake, we should note that Carter's contract doesn't expire next summer, nor is it a team option. It's what one might term as a "semi-expiring" deal. Yes, it can end next summer, but it'll come at a price.
Carter has a partially guaranteed deal for the 2011/12 season. If he is not waived before June 30, 2011, Carter's salary of $18.3 million becomes fully guaranteed; if he is waived by the above date, he pockets $4 million and becomes an unrestricted free agent on July 1. The $4 million figure will stay on his team's cap for that year.
I assure you I'm not picking nits here; these distinctions are important. If the Magic elect to trade Carter, they'll likely have to include $3 million in cash--the maximum allowable amoun--in the bargain to cover most of Carter's guarantee, which is a fact to consider when trying to evaluate potential trade partners. Which ones wouldn't mind having to cover $1 million of Carter's guarantee? Would they demand another asset, such as a future draft pick, as further compensation?
Those details don't change the fact that Carter will almost assuredly become a free-agent next summer, as it's simply hard to imagine that any team is willing to pay him $18.3 million when it could simply pay him to go away. But the circumstances around the pending free agency merit attention. Can't overlook them, no matter how silly they might seem.
live boy d
Banned
- May 3, 2010
- 2,522
- 10
[h2][/h2]
[h2]Vince Carter: The Expiring Contract That Isn't [/h2]
by Ben Q Rock on Jul 25, 2010 8:00 AM EDT in News10 comments
More photos » Phelan Ebenhack - AP
Browse more photos »
In several places around this site, members of the Orlando Pinstriped Post community have written that Orlando Magic guard Vince Carter has an expiring contract, which makes him a desirable trade chip as NBA teams look to cut costs before the next collective bargaining agreement arrives sometime next year, potentially after a lengthy lockout. For clarification's sake, we should note that Carter's contract doesn't expire next summer, nor is it a team option. It's what one might term as a "semi-expiring" deal. Yes, it can end next summer, but it'll come at a price.
Carter has a partially guaranteed deal for the 2011/12 season. If he is not waived before June 30, 2011, Carter's salary of $18.3 million becomes fully guaranteed; if he is waived by the above date, he pockets $4 million and becomes an unrestricted free agent on July 1. The $4 million figure will stay on his team's cap for that year.
I assure you I'm not picking nits here; these distinctions are important. If the Magic elect to trade Carter, they'll likely have to include $3 million in cash--the maximum allowable amoun--in the bargain to cover most of Carter's guarantee, which is a fact to consider when trying to evaluate potential trade partners. Which ones wouldn't mind having to cover $1 million of Carter's guarantee? Would they demand another asset, such as a future draft pick, as further compensation?
Those details don't change the fact that Carter will almost assuredly become a free-agent next summer, as it's simply hard to imagine that any team is willing to pay him $18.3 million when it could simply pay him to go away. But the circumstances around the pending free agency merit attention. Can't overlook them, no matter how silly they might seem.
- Nov 20, 2007
- 87,873
- 50,392
If NO included Peja would the trade work? Would Peja coming off the books help us or would it not matter since we would be way over the cap anyway? Don't bother asking why NO would give us Peja's expiring
I'm just throwing it out there.
- Nov 20, 2007
- 87,873
- 50,392
If NO included Peja would the trade work? Would Peja coming off the books help us or would it not matter since we would be way over the cap anyway? Don't bother asking why NO would give us Peja's expiring
I'm just throwing it out there.
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
lol at the title
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
lol at the title
- Nov 20, 2006
- 1,304
- 10
- Nov 20, 2006
- 1,304
- 10
- Aug 20, 2005
- 11,605
- 143
nyelectric youre so cool.
- Aug 20, 2005
- 11,605
- 143
nyelectric youre so cool.
- Nov 20, 2006
- 1,304
- 10
I know.
- Nov 20, 2006
- 1,304
- 10
I know.
- Aug 20, 2005
- 11,605
- 143
- Aug 20, 2005
- 11,605
- 143
