I don't understand what the lockout was about when teams are throwing max contracts at Hibbert and Landry Fields gets 20 mil, Wasn't the point so teams wouldn't overpay for mediocre players and also could hold on their own players ,now teams are signing restricted free agents to these poison pill contracts making it extremely difficult for the original team to resign them and crippling them financially during the last 2-3 years of that contract. So if you can't get the guy you want you can hurt your competiton by making the former team match a bad contract SMDH
Crap if you're a Knicks fan. Lots of exciting changes if you're an NBA fan.
How is this good for the NBA ? has nothing to do with being a Knick fan those poison pill contracts are bad for teams
Mray20 wrote:How is this good for the NBA ? has nothing to do with being a Knick fan those poison pill contracts are bad for teams
How is it not good? The competitive balance is great. We can look forward to Nash joining the Lakers, Terri in Boston, possibly Dwight in NYC. I don't think the owners are crying right now. It's a much more exciting league than the free-market capitalist MLB.
One thing: the real lockout hasn't taken effect yet. The Super Tax and lowered cap doesn't come into effect until next off-season.
This is one final spending orgy before the harsher rules take effect.
Also, I think you've already seen and will continue to see shorter deals for less money overall. Landry got 3 years $20M, but that was partly about Nash. And in the old days, Landry might've gotten a full MLE of 5yr $40M which is obviously a lot longer and a lot crazier.
Bonn1997 wrote:Mray20 wrote:How is this good for the NBA ? has nothing to do with being a Knick fan those poison pill contracts are bad for teams
How is it not good? The competitive balance is great. We can look forward to Nash joining the Lakers, Terri in Boston, possibly Dwight in NYC. I don't think the owners are crying right now. It's a much more exciting league than the free-market capitalist MLB.
I'm not talking about trades I'm talking about the front loaded and back loaded contracts
Mray20 wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Mray20 wrote:How is this good for the NBA ? has nothing to do with being a Knick fan those poison pill contracts are bad for teams
How is it not good? The competitive balance is great. We can look forward to Nash joining the Lakers, Terri in Boston, possibly Dwight in NYC. I don't think the owners are crying right now. It's a much more exciting league than the free-market capitalist MLB.
I'm not talking about trades I'm talking about the front loaded and back loaded contracts
Why? Who cares? Teams have front and back loaded contracts for years anyway. If it becomes more or less common, it doesn't affect me.
Obviously you don't know anything about the NBA CBA because these backloaded contracts started this season , before you could not jump from 5 mil to 10 year it was only small percentage increases over the course of the contract , and you should care because it locks up the team that has to match the offer in the last couple of years and you run the risk of hitting the 74 mil hard cap threshold which would prevent you from singing even a player for minimum nba salary
Mray20 wrote:Obviously you don't know anything about the NBA CBA because these backloaded contracts started this season , before you could not jump from 5 mil to 10 year it was only small percentage increases over the course of the contract , and you should care because it locks up the team that has to match the offer in the last couple of years and you run the risk of hitting the 74 mil hard cap threshold which would prevent you from singing even a player for minimum nba salary
You're wrong. There were back-loaded contracts. The back-loading just wasn't nearly as drastic as it is now - except before the salary cap, at which point I believe you could load a contract however you wanted to.
i dont understand how players traded exemption could be carried over to the following year.
I believe we had to use or lose it, that is why we kept using it on scrubs like, Francis, Jalen Rose, Penny, Cuttino Mobley....
Even Jeremy Lin's contract, Houston doesn't want to offer a contract like $40m, in case Knick's don't match. with 5,5, 15, 15.
Instead he uses a team option, for the 4th year, giving room for error.
He loss Dragic and Lowry for crap in a horrible draft/ and is busy thinking of ways to screw the Knicks.
Dragic is way superior to Lin, yet he couldn't offer him the same contract he is willing to poison the Knicks with.
Houston just made their own bed, The 2012+ of the Clippers for FA's and NBA future drafts.
RonRon wrote:i dont understand how players traded exemption could be carried over to the following year.
I believe we had to use or lose it, that is why we kept using it on scrubs like, Francis, Jalen Rose, Penny, Cuttino Mobley....
I think you have it for a calendar year. that particular exemption the lakers used on nash came from the knicks trade for tyson chandler in december 2011. dallas flipped it right away to the lakers for odom. lakers used it six months later to get nash.
RonRon wrote:Even Jeremy Lin's contract, Houston doesn't want to offer a contract like $40m, in case Knick's don't match. with 5,5, 15, 15.
Instead he uses a team option, for the 4th year, giving room for error.
He loss Dragic and Lowry for crap in a horrible draft/ and is busy thinking of ways to screw the Knicks.
Dragic is way superior to Lin, yet he couldn't offer him the same contract he is willing to poison the Knicks with.
Houston just made their own bed, The 2012+ of the Clippers for FA's and NBA future drafts.
He did offer the same contract to Dragic but Dragic wanted a player option not a team.
Bonn1997 wrote:Mray20 wrote:Obviously you don't know anything about the NBA CBA because these backloaded contracts started this season , before you could not jump from 5 mil to 10 year it was only small percentage increases over the course of the contract , and you should care because it locks up the team that has to match the offer in the last couple of years and you run the risk of hitting the 74 mil hard cap threshold which would prevent you from singing even a player for minimum nba salary
You're wrong. There were back-loaded contracts. The back-loading just wasn't nearly as drastic as it is now - except before the salary cap, at which point I believe you could load a contract however you wanted to.
the backloading has existed since at least 2005 when the arenas provision was put in the CBA.
before that the CBA was worse.
