Knicks · Salary cap has no chance of working--heres why (page 1)

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

Middle players are paid higher than before, and there's NO CAP left for the minimums.

The league is very salary top-heavy

Caseloads wrote:Middle players are paid higher than before, and there's NO CAP left for the minimums.

So do you image the minimums are going to take their balls and go home since there is nothing left for them.

As you pointed out in another thread. The NBA needs 450 warm bodies.

If last year 300 got all the money and 150 got the scraps, this year 250 will get all the money and 200 will get the scraps.

The 450, however, will remain a constant and the scrap heap will get bigger and more diverse.

Knickoftime wrote:

Caseloads wrote:Middle players are paid higher than before, and there's NO CAP left for the minimums.

So do you image the minimums are going to take their balls and go home since there is nothing left for them.

As you pointed out in another thread. The NBA needs 450 warm bodies.

If last year 300 got all the money and 150 got the scraps, this year 250 will get all the money and 200 will get the scraps.

The 450, however, will remain a constant and the scrap heap will get bigger and more diverse.

The 200 left over will get scraps. If teams can't offer more because they are at the cap, that's what it is. The remaining players will take what is left, as that is their only option.

SwishAndDish13 wrote:The big issue that will need to be worked out in the new CBA is actual superstars not being able to get fair value relative to market. There will be much pain and suffering in negotiations. They have a but of loopholes and nonsense things that need to get fixed. The fact that only middle of the road players get to negotiate is beyond broken.

SwishAndDish13 wrote:The big issue that will need to be worked out in the new CBA is actual superstars not being able to get fair value relative to market. There will be much pain and suffering in negotiations. They have a but of loopholes and nonsense things that need to get fixed. The fact that only middle of the road players get to negotiate is beyond broken.

Almost impossible to work out. The max superstars make up a small percentage of the league, and you need the support of the full union to have any leverage to get a change.

There is no way the NBAPA is going to have the internal support to change the current system.

Caseloads wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:The big issue that will need to be worked out in the new CBA is actual superstars not being able to get fair value relative to market. There will be much pain and suffering in negotiations. They have a but of loopholes and nonsense things that need to get fixed. The fact that only middle of the road players get to negotiate is beyond broken.

Agreed. How do you allow for "SUPERMAX" contracts? would have to be something like, been awarded several all-stars or MVP or all-team NBA, championships, etc.

In a cap environment, why would the majority of the union support taking away from the vast majority to give more to a smaller %?

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

Sure If there is no lockout I will freely admit I was off on this one

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

Sure If there is no lockout I will freely admit I was off on this one

Will you acknowledge now it's the same exact system of dividing revenue it's always been (and in fact, less advantageous to the players since the last CBA), and just the revenue (guaranteed for 9 more years) has changed?

Because once you wrap you head around that, the rest falls into place.

Knickoftime wrote:

Caseloads wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:The big issue that will need to be worked out in the new CBA is actual superstars not being able to get fair value relative to market. There will be much pain and suffering in negotiations. They have a but of loopholes and nonsense things that need to get fixed. The fact that only middle of the road players get to negotiate is beyond broken.

Agreed. How do you allow for "SUPERMAX" contracts? would have to be something like, been awarded several all-stars or MVP or all-team NBA, championships, etc.

In a cap environment, why would the majority of the union support taking away from the vast majority to give more to a smaller %?

I actually see it as an increase in the max or no max bc not having negotiations of contracts isn't really in the best interest of the players. This may adversely impact guys like Delly and Moz who hit the lottery but the flip slide is there really is no market for negotiations with great players.

I also see a push for a tiered cap which some owners may fight. They need that and the max to create a more fair market.

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

Also, your math is wrong. Use this

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/new-york-knic...

With 9 under contract and Hernangomez likely on a rookie minimum contract, plus we have cap holds on Thomas and Galloway. Thats 12 players with 4.2mm, the room exception and as many vet minimum contracts as you want. All three rookie min contracts can be timed to use cap exceptions... you only NEED 10 contracts, so, really they have about 5.7mm or so for 1 FA plus thr room exception.

That still leaves the possibility to sign and trade KOQ, Galloway, Thomas and/or Williams to creat a little multiplier on salary.

So, the lawyers and accountants can still create more wiggle room.

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

Your right this will be a disaster

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

There will be less guys in the middle I think

Jmpasq wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The salary cap went up only 24mm from 70 to 94

Last year our pay roll was 75
Carmelo Anthony 22,875,000
Robin Lopez 28 $13,000,000
Arron Afflalo $8,000,000 Cap Space $8,000,000
Jose Calderon $7,402,812 9
Derrick Williams $4,900,000
top 5 guys were 54mm allowing us to pay over 20mm to the last 9 guys

This years unit
Carmelo 25000000
Rose 21000000
Noah 18000000
Lee 12500000
KP 4300000
---------------------
80mm allowing us to spend 14mm on the remaining 9 guys of which 5mm is already guaranteed.

It just wont workout correctly for teams or the league--this wont work. If you make a mistake paying a guy 18-24mm you are in real trouble because the talent you could once acquire for 2-5mm is not there any more the cap did not go high enough to support the middle and lower players which are necessary

What they will need to do is cut down the % of a cap per slot so salary slides more balanced. Say capping the top 5 slots at 65%

This post serves as an example of the lack of desire (not ability) for some fans to understand NBA economics.

There are probably a dozens ways to illustrate the flaw in the logic here.

I'll go with this one:

Let's for example say the NBA has 450 active players (30 x 15).

The NBA has a cap.

The cap was raised 35%.

But some guys are getting raises of several hundred percent.

But not all 450 players can get those percentages of raises. Teams would go over the cap by mathematical certainty.

So in ANY NBA economic scenario, they'll always be a pool of players that will have to play for the scraps, no matter what the top guys are making. In fact, this year's numbers make it likely the pool of scrap players will in fact be larger, not smaller.

Eventually the 85% will be spent by everyone and the pool of guys looking for $2 to $5m or less will be no less than it ever was.

The NBA system has not changed. It's the same CBA it has been and it's terms are worse for the players than the last CBA. There will now be as there always has been the haves and have not.

The equation hasn't changed, just the quotients.

The NBA will still need and have the same pool of 450 active players and they can't all get ridiculous raises.

Just consider for a few moments you're wrong Briggs. You'll be better informed for it.

There will be less guys in the middle I think

So?

SwishAndDish13 wrote:The big issue that will need to be worked out in the new CBA is actual superstars not being able to get fair value relative to market. There will be much pain and suffering in negotiations. They have a but of loopholes and nonsense things that need to get fixed. The fact that only middle of the road players get to negotiate is beyond broken.

Yep the top level players are underpaid, to many mediocre players are making huge amounts of cash because there is just not enough great players and the top players are capped