|
What is going to be your favorite offseason storyline? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| The Big3 Tourney |
|
67 | 22.41% |
| Will Lakers draft Ball |
|
40 | 13.38% |
| Where will the Pauls go |
|
54 | 18.06% |
| Will LeBron jump ship to the Spurs or ?? |
|
41 | 13.71% |
| Will every team in the league just pivot towards tanking |
|
97 | 32.44% |
| Total: | 210 votes | ||
|
Eltoasto posted:Wasn't it the players who were adamantly against smoothing the cap? Guess the smart ones cashed in, meanwhile my savvy team is going to get Cole Aldrich FOR FREE Awwwww yeah boi!!!
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:34 |
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:What is cap smoothing? The cap is determined by the amount of revenue coming in. Due to the new TV deal, last year's cap jumped from 70 million in the 15-16 season to 94 million in the 16-17 season. This is what caused all the massive spending and overpaying of many free agents. This year's cap was projected to jump as well (though not by as much), but due to various factors it did not. Cap smoothing would have, well, smoothed out the jump. So instead of going from 70 to 94 in one year, they would have spaced it out and maybe only increased it by like 7 million per year (I don't know the actual number I'm just tossing that out there) until it was where it should be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
^^^not just growing slower. It would have been lower than it should be for a few years, then higher than it should be for a few years to balance it out. Most people on this board were against cap smoothing too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Most people on this board were against cap smoothing too. The assumption was that the owners would've pocketed the difference, which is unacceptable
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
I was and still am. Artificially limiting the money given out for a set period of time isn't the right move. Owners and GM's not spending too drat much is the move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
EvanTH posted:The assumption was that the owners would've pocketed the difference, which is unacceptable Nah, it was always going to be given to the players' union to distribute as they saw fit. quote:The NBA suggested that the difference be given to the union in a lump sum and divided evenly among all players. So instead of a few free agents in 2016 benefiting, all players would get a smaller piece of the TV rights deal increase. But Roberts believed long-term it would not be a benefit to the players. morestuff fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
the league could give every team a one-time extra MLE or something
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
I'm not nearly smart enough to know if cap smoothing is good or bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Lockback posted:^^^not just growing slower. It would have been lower than it should be for a few years, then higher than it should be for a few years to balance it out. I'm still against on principle because it is extremely anti-labor. In hindsight a move where the cap was smoothed, with the difference being paid out to the players in some capacity was the right/most ethical move but that would never happen. It's amazing how short sighted people became with cap space, including people on this board, were after the spike. Hindsight is 20/20 and all, but it's pretty obvious how damaging some of those contracts would be in the long run. Shear Modulus posted:the league could give every team a one-time extra MLE or something This doesn't really fix the problem of a huge number of teams being in the tax. morestuff posted:Nah, it was always going to be given to the players' union to distribute as they saw fit. If this is actually the case, then the players union hosed up really, really badly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
a precedent that the players have to gently caress with their already artificially capped wages could absolutely be a longterm problem that is hard to conceptualize and harder to weigh against the uhh issues that came out of the cap jump i dont really know if it was right or not from the players point of view
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:I'm still against on principle because it is extremely anti-labor. In hindsight a move where the cap was smoothed, with the difference being paid out to the players in some capacity was the right/most ethical move but that would never happen. That's exactly what was offered, though. They were still going to be getting the 51% split agreed to in the CBA. Some of the bad contracts given out last year are just bad contracts, but it's also just a really simple supply-and-demand thing. If there's a crazy amount of bidders the bids are going to increase
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Nah, it was always going to be given to the players' union to distribute as they saw fit. An assumption... wrong!?? Give me a bit, this is new to me In that case I don't fully understand Roberts' opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Less caps on wages the better. Short term it may cause issues. But it all equals out on the end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
I for one am glad mozgov got paid due to the cap spike
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Kibner posted:Expiring contracts are going to be worth something again! This is good for the Nets so I support it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
EvanTH posted:An assumption... wrong!?? Give me a bit, this is new to me Yeah, I don't understand why people have opinions when it is like a paragraph to read up, but they options were either splitting money or equalizing total payout over xxx number of years. There was never a "owners keep the money" option but that didn't stop people being mad about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
In hindsight the Gorgui deal is really not as good as it was eight months ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Reworking the cap in mid contract is also a bad precedent that conceivably lowers the unions bargaining position in future discussions
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
pubic works project posted:https://twitter.com/ESPNForsberg/status/882602054950072322 headline on the right reads "messy exit likely to haunt gordon" lol okay yeah sure neat there was like an hour of confusion because his trainer followed some people before he made an official announcement thanking Utah for everything I'm sure he'll be unable to sleep for months
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
i recall the union ended up hiring some accountants or economists to study the proposal and they concluded that it would cause a net reduction in players' income (mostly from knock-on effects from capping demand i would suspect) i also think the players could reasonably suspect that the owners would be able to try some shady accounting from the opportunities that a new layer of complexity would introduce
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
I don't think last year or this year's free agency would look that much different with cap smoothing. Last year there were lots of teams with cap space and a few free agents. This year it's the opposite. Also cap smoothing would've meant more money going towards rookies and less towards free agents (like Lebron and CP3 who were in charge of the union), so it makes some sense why the NBAPA rejected it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:Next year is even worse, there are going to be almost no teams with cap room and most teams are going to be in the tax. yeah, this is only the beginning. The cap projects to increase by ~3 million a year but stay reasonably flat in the medium term--only an unexpected influx of money from jersey ads could bump that number up by a significant amount. Assuming about 1/5 of the league is in FA every summer, there won't be money for anyone outside the top 30. Some teams that are capped out now could run their course during this time period and end up with a ton of space (OKC comes to mind), but most teams trying to make the playoffs will be in absolute cap hell. And that tv deal is locked in for 9 years. I cannot understand why the one-player-one-vote player's union would ever have agreed to this if they had any notion of this outcome. Did Chris Paul and Michele Roberts mislead the rank and file? Roberts wanted to look tough or whatever and told the owners to shove it on cap smoothing; now the majority of mid-career guys looking for their second or third contract will be screwed as a result. I can see why the players involved in leadership (Paul, James, Curry, Carmelo) would lie/go along with Roberts, because they know the league will always find a favorable deal for them. But yeesh, they really hosed over the middle class of the league.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
EvanTH posted:I'm sure he'll be unable to sleep for months Yeah, especially after seeing those headlines. Someone get the guy an emotional support animal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
I wish you a great success VMIDexo posted:Less caps on wages the better. I don't know, if you look at actor /actress salaries, a few people get 20m a movie and a lot of people never pass 6 figures, despite being well known, talented, etc. The cast budget is going to the stars. I don't know if you could build a team like Golden State or San Antonio if your players weren't making comparable salaries. The last time the NBA was filled with huge awful max deals the basketball was bad. From a philosophical basketball entertainment perspective a more equitable distribution is better. If the players get more it should be from the owners end rather than each other
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Metapod posted:I for one am glad mozgov got paid due to the cap spike Mozgov didn't get paid due to the cap spike, he got paid due to a dumb rear end Lakers FO
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SBNation/status/882631659094396928 also https://twitter.com/its_whitney/status/875903451837992960
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Hashtag Banterzone posted:I don't think last year or this year's free agency would look that much different with cap smoothing. Last year there were lots of teams with cap space and a few free agents. This year it's the opposite. That's kind of the point of cap smoothing, though, there would have been significantly fewer teams with cap space last year
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
That's terrible holy hell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Also the Bulls have cap space next year  so that's good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
EvanTH posted:headline on the right reads "messy exit likely to haunt gordon" lol okay yeah sure neat I don't know if he cares, but this isn't what happened. Someone in his camp leaked to reporters he was going to Boston before he had a chance to tell Utah, he got pissed and had his agent deny that a decision was made, lots of Utah fans got false hope, it lingered most of the day, and then he broke their hearts all over again with that stupid players tribune thing. The instagram thing came out after his initial denial and doesn't have anything to do with it. It was a bad way to handle it. If you're going to leave anyway just confirm it once it gets out, don't give people false hope just for the sake of some dumb ghost written letter that doesn't serve any purpose aside from making you feel like you handled things in a classy way by thanking Utah on the way out the door. MourningView fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Small markets exist to give big markets stars, also c'mon look at em.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
They both look like a couple of assholes tho Utah is upset because Hayward looks like their Mormon kids, like in the middle of a play he's going to stop defending and very politely ask if his opponent has heard the Good News
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Hayward was just really pissed off about the Mountain Meadows massacre and that's understandable
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:i recall the union ended up hiring some accountants or economists to study the proposal and they concluded that it would cause a net reduction in players' income (mostly from knock-on effects from capping demand i would suspect) It doesn't introduce any new complexity. There's already an escrowed wage pool that normalizes wages to the final cap. In this case the pool would just be really big for a few years. Spreading the extra evenly doesn't make sense (it should be proportional to contract like the rest of the escrow) and sounds like a scare tactic to get stars on board. The real beneficiaries of the jump were owners who got under the tax or got room for a max, who got a big leg up relative to other owners. Players who were FAs last year benefitted as well but that's a fairly small and not especially influential group. And max deal guys don't benefit at all (relatives to proportionally distributed smoothing) because they would be escrowed into a "shadow cap" max. The only players who won were guys like Mozgov who got a much larger % of a team cap than they normally would have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Eltoasto posted:Small markets exist to give big markets stars, also c'mon look at em. My beautiful son
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
like Lmao. The Bulls if they wanted to could only have like ~25-30 million(Keeping Zipser, Valentine, Dunn, and Lavine(they have to probably pay him but have his cap hold as comically low))assuming they trade Rolo this year which I am assuming will happen) on the books next year. Can't wait for all of the Bulls fans to once again get their hopes up for like a Lebron only to be dashed embarrassingly. Though they have tons of space to take on lovely contracts and picks for teams looking to shed salary for BronBron.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
That Player's Tribune piece was garbage. "Salt Lake City is an amazing place full of wonderful people and the Jazz helped mold me into the man I am today. Well, bye"
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:Mozgov didn't get paid due to the cap spike, he got paid due to a dumb rear end Lakers FO But it was the cap spike that created the opportunity
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:It doesn't introduce any new complexity. There's already an escrowed wage pool that normalizes wages to the final cap. In this case the pool would just be really big for a few years. Spreading the extra evenly doesn't make sense (it should be proportional to contract like the rest of the escrow) and sounds like a scare tactic to get stars on board. The real beneficiaries of the jump were owners who got under the tax or got room for a max, who got a big leg up relative to other owners. Players who were FAs last year benefitted as well but that's a fairly small and not especially influential group. And max deal guys don't benefit at all (relatives to proportionally distributed smoothing) because they would be escrowed into a "shadow cap" max. The only players who won were guys like Mozgov who got a much larger % of a team cap than they normally would have. The best solution for everybody at this point might be temporarily raising the tax level by 5-10 million, but I don't know if that's possible under the CBA or what consequences there'd be
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:34 |
|
|
Giving GMs more money to play with is like raising a little kid's allowance and they should be expected to spend it in a similar manner
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 18:29
|
|