CBA Proposal: How to Encourage Players to Stay on Home Teams
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:47 am    Post subject: CBA Proposal: How to Encourage Players to Stay on Home Teams

On the one hand, it’s a damn shame to see HOF-players like Duncan/Dirk take major paycuts in order to stay on their home team and allow the team to build a contender around them. This essentially allows the owner to benefit from the labor-side taking discounts to benefit the owner.

On the other hand, you have Kobe who is set to make $48m the next 2 years. He’s worth that $ from a business/loyalty standpoint, but it’s rough on the salary cap and makes it difficult to build a contender around a player who takes up nearly 40% of the cap.

Bottom line: why should the players, who already surrendered BRI income in the last CBA be forced to take financial paycuts to stay on a team?

Proposal: players AND teams should be given incentives to retain players like Duncan/Dirk/Kobe, pay them the appropriate salary, while not destroying a team’s salary cap in the process. A system should be in place where a salary cap % discount is offered to players that hit a certain tenure on team. Tenure would have to be continous so in order to get a year 10 discount, have to be on the same team 10 straight years. Any interruption of that starts the clock over.

For example, using Kobe.

Year 5 (2000-01): $10m
Year 10 (2005-06): $16m
Year 15 (2010-11): $25m
Year 19 (2015-16): $25m

I think beginning in year 10, the NBA should offer a sliding % discount, culminating at say year 15 when the salary cap impact of the player should be discounted by 50%. Reaching 15 years in the league is a rare feat, and by that time, most players are already hitting mid-30s and are out of their primes. Now, players/GMs can try to manipulate this system by still taking a smaller cut, but that’s on them if they really want to take a financial discount despite offering a salary cap discount.

So in our scenario, at age 32 (2010-11), Kobe would be paid $25m but the salary cap hit would be 12.5m. In year 19, Kobe again is paid $25m but the salary cap hit would be 12.5m.

This system codifies (without the financial detriment to the player) a system that has been effective in Dallas and the Spurs. Why not pay long-time HOF-stars like Dirk/Duncan $15m, with only a $7.5m cap hit? This is an equitable solution for both sides.

Imagine if Kobe’s cap hit was only 12.5m (20% of cap) instead of 25m (39% of cap)? I think almost everyone would be happy in this scenario.
Of course, the owners may not be satisfied but if their “stated” goal is to improve the team, then it gives them a means to improve the team while taking care of their long-time stars.

This would also cut against the Miami-Big 3 model, and would hurt someone like Lebron unless he took a major paycut.

Pros for both owners/players:

1. players: get paid fair market value which doesn't hamper building a team around them from a salary cap standpoint.

2. owners: continuity of long-term player, can still build a team around their long-time star while offering fair value. Hampers team-shopping by guys like Lebron and promotes building a culture/core in one location.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:53 am    Post subject:

Vis-a-vis the Lakers, I understand this system is contrary to their "we will sign our next free agent via free agency" mantra. But in my proposed system, you can still buy free agents; you just won't get the salary cap discount until they hit the 10 year mark, which they likely won't.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:58 am    Post subject:

Love an idea like this. If Kobe's cap hit was 50% of what it is now, why do I care what he is making.

I feel like there are potential holes here though, but I gotta think them through first.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31935
Location: Manhattan

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:01 am    Post subject:

In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.
_________________
Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:03 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Love an idea like this. If Kobe's cap hit was 50% of what it is now, why do I care what he is making.

I feel like there are potential holes here though, but I gotta think them through first.


Of course there are potential holes. But I think in the next CBA negotiations (and I now do this as a living so just had some ideas to kick around), both parties will legitimately point out:

1. players: why the hell are we forced to take massive paycuts to put a roster around me?

2. owners: the players have seized too much control (LBJ) and are now the GMs. We need a mechanism to incentivize staying on a team besides Bird Rights and the ability to offer a 5 year max after a rookie deal.

This kind of addresses both. It doesn't impinge on a player's right to be a free agent. But if you want to put a super team together, it's going to have a quick expiration date. But if you stay on your team, get that salary cap % discount, now you can get paid AND put a real contender around you even after you've hit your 10th and 15th (plus) years.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:04 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Yo, you got some real issues man. Trying to put together a constructive proposal and that's all you can focus on?

I'm pointing out that's the flaw in the current system. That a guy like Kobe can't get paid without hurting the salary cap space.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:06 am    Post subject:

Ringfinger, I think one flaw would be how many players would be given the salary cap discount. So if a team drafts 3-4 studs in the lottery b/c they suck, will they then get to keep them all 10 years and get % discounts on the cap too? Maybe you have to limit it to 1 maybe 2 players max per team. Like a reverse amnesty designation.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:06 am    Post subject:

I like it.

Let me tell you, Duncan's paycut to help the team "win" is straight up BS. His paycut, as well as Tony's and Manu's, is all for the benefit of the owner. All three of them could have made the maximum and they would still have the same team. Let's break it down.

Duncan - draft pick
Manu - draft pick
Tony - draft pick
Kawhi - trade for George Hill who was a draft pick
Tiago - draft pick
Danny Green - minimum guy and signed for less than the MLE in 2012
Boris Diaw - was picked up for the minimum after clearing waivers
Patty Mills - has been a minimum guy for three years now
Belinelli - signed for less than the tax MLE
Joseph - draft pick
Bonner - was traded for Nesterovic in 2006


Last edited by dmorans1 on Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:08 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gimme_the_rock
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11882
Location: Looking outta the window, watching the asphalt grow ...

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:07 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Back in the breaking days, you could say that upon finishing his airplane windmills-into-a-backspin, Chronicle pointed at yinoma.
_________________
We back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:08 am    Post subject:

dmorans1 wrote:
I like it.

Let me tell you, Duncan's paycut to help the team "win" is straight up BS. His paycut, as well as Tony's and Manu's, is all for the benefit of the owner. All three of them could have made the maximum and they would still have the same team. Let's break it down.

Duncan - draft pick
Manu - draft pick
Tony - draft pick
Kawhi - trade for George Hill who was a draft pick
Tiago - draft pick
Danny Green - signed for less than the MLE in 2012
Boris Diaw - was picked up for the minimum after clearing waivers
Patty Mills - has been a minimum guy for three years now
Belinelli - signed for less than the tax MLE
Joseph - draft pick
Bonner - was traded for Nesterovic in 2006


And I think a way to cap the $$$ for owners is to only be able to designate 1-2 players in a finite period of time, or until said players retire. Like a team has 1-2 of these designations that they can use.

Everyone should be happy theoretically speaking. And it exposes those franchises that used players and made them take less $ and then with the cap space, they have no excuse to not spend lest that player bolts.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:09 am    Post subject:

Gimme_the_rock wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Back in the breaking days, you could say that upon finishing his airplane windmills-into-a-backspin, Chronicle pointed at yinoma.


Except I'm playing chess, he's playing checkers.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:10 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Ringfinger, I think one flaw would be how many players would be given the salary cap discount. So if a team drafts 3-4 studs in the lottery b/c they suck, will they then get to keep them all 10 years and get % discounts on the cap too? Maybe you have to limit it to 1 maybe 2 players max per team. Like a reverse amnesty designation.


Maybe like the NBA's own incarnation of the franchise tag.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mporter
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 30 Oct 2005
Posts: 628

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:14 am    Post subject:

I really like your idea. My only disagreement is your assertion that players get "fair market value." As it stands now, the max player salary is some arbitrary number them owners came up with.

I'd like to see the NBA adopt something like your "discount" idea to take care of franchise cornerstone players without them having to make a huge financial sacrifice or the team risking its future financial flexibility. I'd also do something to lift the cap on individual salaries. Keep the team cap, but allow players to get paid whatever the clubs think is really his fair market value. This satisfies the players wish to get paid, while giving smaller market teams the opportunity to offer superstars whatever portion of the cap they deem is appropriate for that player. If Sacramento thinks Lebron is worth 80% of the cap, and Lebron wants to get PAID, why not?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:14 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Ringfinger, I think one flaw would be how many players would be given the salary cap discount. So if a team drafts 3-4 studs in the lottery b/c they suck, will they then get to keep them all 10 years and get % discounts on the cap too? Maybe you have to limit it to 1 maybe 2 players max per team. Like a reverse amnesty designation.


Maybe like the NBA's own incarnation of the franchise tag.


I don't follow football as closely, but I don't think they're that similar. It's really a combination of rewarding longevity, loyalty, and then allowing that player to benefit from same by giving his team extra salary cap room to build the team. I'm sure Larry Coon has more intricacies and can point to the flaws in this system, but if I could, this is the system I'd put in place.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31935
Location: Manhattan

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:16 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Gimme_the_rock wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Back in the breaking days, you could say that upon finishing his airplane windmills-into-a-backspin, Chronicle pointed at yinoma.


Except I'm playing chess, he's playing checkers.


In my defense, after having programmed an AI for chess I have found out that it is the dullest game in the history of the world. I'm trying to avoid it for a few years at least.


also:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Tenure would have to be continous so in order to get a year 10 discount, have to be on the same team 10 straight years. Any interruption of that starts the clock over.


I don't think this is necessary. Playing 10 years with a team is impressive whether or not you took a break after a few years or not. We could call it the Derek Fisher rule.


and
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vis-a-vis the Lakers, I understand this system is contrary to their "we will sign our next free agent via free agency" mantra. But in my proposed system, you can still buy free agents; you just won't get the salary cap discount until they hit the 10 year mark, which they likely won't.


Kareem played with the Lakers for 14 years
_________________
Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:17 am    Post subject:

mporter wrote:
I really like your idea. My only disagreement is your assertion that players get "fair market value." As it stands now, the max player salary is some arbitrary number them owners came up with.

I'd like to see the NBA adopt something like your "discount" idea to take care of franchise cornerstone players without them having to make a huge financial sacrifice or the team risking its future financial flexibility. I'd also do something to lift the cap on individual salaries. Keep the team cap, but allow players to get paid whatever the clubs think is really his fair market value. This satisfies the players wish to get paid, while giving smaller market teams the opportunity to offer superstars whatever portion of the cap they deem is appropriate for that player. If Sacramento thinks Lebron is worth 80% of the cap, and Lebron wants to get PAID, why not?


Yeah. But that's REALLY tearing apart the current system and the status quo of it for the past 20 years. FMV was just a term of art to say that Duncan probably gets $15-16m instead of $9m, Dirk probably gets $15-16m instead of $8m, Kobe probably gets around the same amount but the FO would have less blowback b/c the cap hit is significantly reduced. In fact, it favors a big market team like the Lakers b/c I'm fairly certain we'd use that cap space to surround Kobe with another good player.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:18 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Gimme_the_rock wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Back in the breaking days, you could say that upon finishing his airplane windmills-into-a-backspin, Chronicle pointed at yinoma.


Except I'm playing chess, he's playing checkers.


In my defense, after having programmed an AI for chess I have found out that it is the dullest game in the history of the world. I'm trying to avoid it for a few years at least.


also:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Tenure would have to be continous so in order to get a year 10 discount, have to be on the same team 10 straight years. Any interruption of that starts the clock over.


I don't think this is necessary. Playing 10 years with a team is impressive whether or not you took a break after a few years or not. We could call it the Derek Fisher rule.


and
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vis-a-vis the Lakers, I understand this system is contrary to their "we will sign our next free agent via free agency" mantra. But in my proposed system, you can still buy free agents; you just won't get the salary cap discount until they hit the 10 year mark, which they likely won't.


Kareem played with the Lakers for 14 years




Re: 10 years, I think the whole point is to promote continous stay on the same team, only way the owners would agree to it. It frankly favors owners overall, but it doesn't hurt the players either.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:19 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Ringfinger, I think one flaw would be how many players would be given the salary cap discount. So if a team drafts 3-4 studs in the lottery b/c they suck, will they then get to keep them all 10 years and get % discounts on the cap too? Maybe you have to limit it to 1 maybe 2 players max per team. Like a reverse amnesty designation.


Maybe like the NBA's own incarnation of the franchise tag.


I don't follow football as closely, but I don't think they're that similar. It's really a combination of rewarding longevity, loyalty, and then allowing that player to benefit from same by giving his team extra salary cap room to build the team. I'm sure Larry Coon has more intricacies and can point to the flaws in this system, but if I could, this is the system I'd put in place.


They're not similar, that's why I said NBA's own incarnation. So the idea is each team in the NBA could place the "franchise tag" on a particular player and that's the one player for whom the team will receive the salary cap discount.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31935
Location: Manhattan

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:20 am    Post subject:

The NBA already knows a "desginated player" tag. Derrick Rose was the first to get one, Oklahoma has two of them becuase of technicalities which is really stupid but NBA is full of stupid basketball decisions.
_________________
Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:25 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
The NBA already knows a "desginated player" tag. Derrick Rose was the first to get one, Oklahoma has two of them becuase of technicalities which is really stupid but NBA is full of stupid basketball decisions.


Yeah, but that's unrelated to this proposal. That speaks IIRC to the length/amount of the contract for a rookie player. But I guess your point is the NBA already has that term "Designated Player."
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gimme_the_rock
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11882
Location: Looking outta the window, watching the asphalt grow ...

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:38 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Gimme_the_rock wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
In this system, he would have gotten the max he'd be allowed to get which would have been about 34m meaning 17m against the cap and you would still have complained.


Back in the breaking days, you could say that upon finishing his airplane windmills-into-a-backspin, Chronicle pointed at yinoma.


Except I'm playing chess, he's playing checkers.


Don't you mean, you're doing the Viennese waltz?

Do try and keep with the analogy please.
_________________
We back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gimme_the_rock
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11882
Location: Looking outta the window, watching the asphalt grow ...

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:40 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
In my defense, after having programmed an AI for chess ...


Nerd smack!!!
_________________
We back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:52 am    Post subject: Re: CBA Proposal: How to Encourage Players to Stay on Home Teams

yinoma2001 wrote:


Pros for both owners/players:

1. players: get paid fair market value which doesn't hamper building a team around them from a salary cap standpoint.

2. owners: continuity of long-term player, can still build a team around their long-time star while offering fair value. Hampers team-shopping by guys like Lebron and promotes building a culture/core in one location.




I doubt the players union would go for that. No matter how the pie is divided, the owners pay the exact same amount in salaries -- 52% or whatever it is of total revenues.

So basically, your proposal would shift more money from the lesser players to the stars. And since there are more lesser players than stars in the union, the union likes maximum caps on the stars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:56 am    Post subject: Re: CBA Proposal: How to Encourage Players to Stay on Home Teams

activeverb wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:


Pros for both owners/players:

1. players: get paid fair market value which doesn't hamper building a team around them from a salary cap standpoint.

2. owners: continuity of long-term player, can still build a team around their long-time star while offering fair value. Hampers team-shopping by guys like Lebron and promotes building a culture/core in one location.




I doubt the players union would go for that. No matter how the pie is divided, the owners pay the exact same amount in salaries -- 52% or whatever it is of total revenues.

So basically, your proposal would shift more money from the lesser players to the stars. And since there are more lesser players than stars in the union, the union likes maximum caps on the stars.


You're right, the # of players that will be eligible for the 10, 15 (plus) salary cap discount won't be that many it seems.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:00 am    Post subject: Re: CBA Proposal: How to Encourage Players to Stay on Home Teams

yinoma2001 wrote:
activeverb wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:


Pros for both owners/players:

1. players: get paid fair market value which doesn't hamper building a team around them from a salary cap standpoint.

2. owners: continuity of long-term player, can still build a team around their long-time star while offering fair value. Hampers team-shopping by guys like Lebron and promotes building a culture/core in one location.




I doubt the players union would go for that. No matter how the pie is divided, the owners pay the exact same amount in salaries -- 52% or whatever it is of total revenues.

So basically, your proposal would shift more money from the lesser players to the stars. And since there are more lesser players than stars in the union, the union likes maximum caps on the stars.


You're right, the # of players that will be eligible for the 10, 15 (plus) salary cap discount won't be that many it seems.


Yeah, basically you'd be asking 97% of the players to sacrifice money so Kobe, Duncan, and a few others stars could make more.

If you were, say, Matt Barnes, would you vote to take $100,000 out of your own pocket so Kobe and Duncan could make more?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB