How would you change the NBA?

[DanH]

Yeah, I get this, but the disparity in contracts from the highest players to the average player would be too high. I can't see the players union ever signing off on it.

Yeah, that's the concern. A high minimum salary might help with that.

[planetmars]

You get rid of max contracts and GM's will start paying non super stars $50M+ deals. You can't give Lebron $70M and expect DeMar to just be happy with $30M. Guys like DeMar, Wall, Kyrie, Love, KAT, Wiggins, Griffin, etc will want $70M as well. And small market teams who want to retain their high end draft picks will do whatever it takes to avoid the constant treadmill of rebuilding/drafting/etc.

I think that no max contracts can lead to a lockout sooner than later.

[JimiCliff]

Yeah, that's the concern. A high minimum salary might help with that.

Right, but the problem there is that hard cap + high minimum salary creates, unintentionally, a max contract value.

So the alternative would have to be no max contract value, high min contract values and...no cap whatsoever. But I'm sure we can all see the problem with this.

[JimiCliff]

I really think the key is eliminating the weighted draft lottery. Imagine if EVERY team was ALWAYS trying 100% to win as many games possible? The league would be unrecognizable, compared to what it is now.

[MixxAOR]

I really think the key is eliminating the weighted draft lottery. Imagine if EVERY team was ALWAYS trying 100% to win as many games possible? The league would be unrecognizable, compared to what it is now.

but there will always be bad teams, they will always be last place, how do bad teams get better?

[JimiCliff]

but there will always be bad teams, they will always be last place, how do bad teams get better?

Well, it's the GM's job to figure that out. That's what they're getting paid millions for.

[JimiCliff]

Also, I'm pretty sure the data shows that the draft lottery doesn't actually help bad teams get better.

[MixxAOR]

Well, it's the GM's job to figure that out. That's what they're getting paid millions for.

Those franchises would be doomed with no free agency attraction and no chance at Top 5 pick

[DanH]

Right, but the problem there is that hard cap + high minimum salary creates, unintentionally, a max contract value.

So the alternative would have to be no max contract value, high min contract values and...no cap whatsoever. But I'm sure we can all see the problem with this.

Okay, sure, if the max salary is on the order of 70-80% of a hard cap, sure, have a max value. As you say, minimums and a hard cap (no matter their value) technically create a maximum.

The point is that if the maximum salary is more than half the cap, and teams can't exceed the cap no matter what, you won't see super teams. You'll see one superstar on each team. Lesser stars could team up if no team will pay them the "max."

[JimiCliff]

Those franchises would be doomed with no free agency attraction and no chance at Top 5 pick

I don't think this is true. It's what we've come to believe, though.

Others have pointed this out: Steph Curry, Devin Booker, Giannis, Donovan Mitchell, Dame Lillard, Kawhi, Klay...there's plenty of examples of franchise player level talent being found later in the draft.

[DanH]

You get rid of max contracts and GM's will start paying non super stars $50M+ deals. You can't give Lebron $70M and expect DeMar to just be happy with $30M. Guys like DeMar, Wall, Kyrie, Love, KAT, Wiggins, Griffin, etc will want $70M as well. And small market teams who want to retain their high end draft picks will do whatever it takes to avoid the constant treadmill of rebuilding/drafting/etc.

I think that no max contracts can lead to a lockout sooner than later.

Why would this lead to a lockout?

DeMar can want the max all he likes - if teams won't pay him the max, he won't get it.

Right now, with the artificially low maxes, player value far exceeds salary for superstars. So the lesser stars like DeMar get paid the same as the superstars - this is a problem. If you remove the artificial max, the value of contracts can be more in line with the value of players. And if a team wants to pay DeMar 70M, they will be mediocre, and that's what they get for overpaying a lesser star. There will always be mediocre teams. C'est la vie.

But far more likely is there will be greater stratification of star money. Some will get the new natural maximum, but very few. Others will earn an amount that will allow for better role players or other lesser stars to join them on their team. The difference in a no-max environment is that any salary inflation of lesser stars and high end role players is going to be based entirely on value distribution. While the current system can have the same flawed value distribution - but also has the artificial suppression of superstar salaries and redistribution of salary to lesser players.

[JimiCliff]

The point is that if the maximum salary is more than half the cap, and teams can't exceed the cap no matter what, you won't see super teams. You'll see one superstar on each team. Lesser stars could team up if no team will pay them the "max."

Even in this scenario, you'd end up with a disparity of wage between the top and the average that I'm not sure the union accepts. Is there another professional league that operates with a hard cap, and no (or, a very high) max salary?

[DanH]

Even in this scenario, you'd end up with a disparity of wage between the top and the average that I'm not sure the union accepts. Is there another professional league that operates with a hard cap, and no (or, a very high) max salary?

Absolutely. I'm describing the ideal situation for league competitiveness. Getting it past the union is a different matter entirely.

If you look at what will likely be suppressed salary for the mid-level players, that's a huge chunk of the league that you can't get to vote for this. But if you can get another huge block of player votes in addition to the stars (and remember, a lot of players think they can join those ranks, it's the way most athletes are wired, so even some of the middle class will vote with eyes that are bigger than their stomachs), you can pass it through. The biggest subset of players? Minimum salary players, rookie scale players, and sub-MLE players. Raise the minimum salary to a point where enough of those players get a raise, and it might get through the union, especially with some of those middle class guys thinking they will slide up rather than down in the new financial world.

I don't believe there is a league that operates in that environment. The NHL essentially does, as no player in the league makes the maximum (they set their maximum above the natural maximum - the maximum enforced by roster sizes, minimum salaries, talent distribution and individual player impact).

[golden]

Even in this scenario, you'd end up with a disparity of wage between the top and the average that I'm not sure the union accepts. Is there another professional league that operates with a hard cap, and no (or, a very high) max salary?

The player's union is a big part of what's wrong with the NBA. The problem with the union is that one player gets one vote, but one player like Lebron generates at least 10X more value than the average NBA player. The other problem is how the union limits the number of players that a team can control which eliminates any type of legitimate minor league player development system and pool of talented players at affordable prices.

If I were the owners, in the next CBA, I'd make a play for player endorsement revenues, since the players are drafted off the NBA's global distribution network to pump up the value of their brands. It's done in entertainment industries, like K-Pop stars and formerly in Hollywood.

[MixxAOR]

I don't think this is true. It's what we've come to believe, though.

Others have pointed this out: Steph Curry, Devin Booker, Giannis, Donovan Mitchell, Dame Lillard, Kawhi, Klay...there's plenty of examples of franchise player level talent being found later in the draft.

Yeah recent drafts were like this. But if you remember Raptors didn't get Allen Iverson because after Orlando Magic got Shaq and Penny, expansion teams were not allowed to have first round pick. It was believed it was unfair advantage. So sometimes it's an era we're in. In the next couple years it might be harder to find those franchise players later in the draft.