Cleveland Cavaliers Offseason 2014

• robj55

  

  KB0938;1631445 wrote:How exactly would the NBA fix this? They cant TELL players where to sign lol, theyve done everything they can with the Salary cap and the Luxury tax ect. But unless you want the NFL NBA MLB ect deciding where free agents go, theres no "fixing" it

  Just a bunch of crybabies, if Cleveland were a big market and free agent destination we wouldn't be hearing a word. Sports have always been this way, people just gloss over what happened in the past and vilify these athletes of today.
• Azubuike24

  

  The issue here, and I posted it here when "the big 3" formed originally is, salary money doesn't matter. The upper echelon players, say the top 10-25 highest-paid guys, usually can make a lot of money outside of their contracts, and even more so, if they cash in early in their career. Smart investments and handling means by time they are 30, their passive income stream can continue until well after retirement.
  
  This creates a market where LeBron and Carmelo, two guys clearly worth top 10 money, can sign for 20-50% less than what they would if it was a true free market without preferences. In addition, it allows the Heat to add guys who have already made tons of cash be much more willing to sign on in Miami at prices they wouldn't consider if it was Toronto, Minnesota or Orlando offering a better deal. Look at Ray Allen, Shane Battier, Mike Miller, Rashard Lewis, etc. Also, look at the type of money LeBron, Wade and even Carmelo make outside of the NBA. Their NBA contracts are absolutely meaningless and if you took a true investment strategist, they would probably say that "taking less" to form a big four would be more profitable in the end.
• KB0938

  I understand with that and agree.....but theres nothing that can be done to change that. Unless you have a mandatory salary that stars would have to be paid, or start telling people where to sign. neither of which i see ever happening
• KB0938

  robj55;1631447 wrote:Just a bunch of crybabies, if Cleveland were a big market and free agent destination we wouldn't be hearing a word. Sports have always been this way, people just gloss over what happened in the past and vilify these athletes of today.

  Pretty much
• like_that

  

  KB0938;1631445 wrote:How exactly would the NBA fix this? They cant TELL players where to sign lol, theyve done everything they can with the Salary cap and the Luxury tax ect. But unless you want the NFL NBA MLB ect deciding where free agents go, theres no "fixing" it

  Franchise tag would be one way to let them know they don't run the league.
  
  

  robj55;1631447 wrote:Just a bunch of crybabies, if Cleveland were a big market and free agent destination we wouldn't be hearing a word. Sports have always been this way, people just gloss over what happened in the past and vilify these athletes of today.

  Crybabies about what? Because lebron left cleveland?? Traditional go to cop out argument for people like you. That happened 4 years ago, thats quite a reach. I sure as hell didn't want dwight howard on my team when he was being a cry baby POS in Orlando. If you think that looks good for the NBA then you are a certified neanderthal /robj
  
  It's pretty sad the most exciting part about the NBA is the off season FA lately.
• KB0938

  Franchise tag would help, I agree with that
• Azubuike24

  

  KB0938;1631454 wrote:I understand with that and agree.....but theres nothing that can be done to change that. Unless you have a mandatory salary that stars would have to be paid, or start telling people where to sign. neither of which i see ever happening

  It's a catch-22. A salary cap means certain teams can't use their revenue to pay players a bigger salary, and furthermore, teams retaining their own players can offer bigger and longer contracts. With that said, the salary cap only applies to the NBA and it doesn't regulate what players can make outside of the league. It basically means that any max contract in New York or Los Angeles has a much higher earning potential than one in Minnesota or Utah.
  
  Chris Bosh and Kevin Love are perfect examples. While neither are with amazing franchises, it was a pretty amicable end for both and both made it well-known they didn't want to be where their careers began.
• robj55

  

  like_that;1631467 wrote:Franchise tag would be one way to let them know they don't run the league.
  
  
  
  
  Crybabies about what? Because lebron left cleveland?? Traditional go to cop out argument for people like you. That happened 4 years ago, thats quite a reach. I sure as hell didn't want dwight howard on my team when he was being a cry baby POS in Orlando. If you think that looks good for the NBA then you are a certified neanderthal /robj
  
  It's pretty sad the most exciting part about the NBA is the off season FA lately.

  No crybabies about how stars run these organizations and blah blah blah. It's ALWAYS been that way. I agree that most of them are spoiled babies but so would anyone else be if they were in that position and they are lying if they say other wise. It's just something we have to deal with as fans of sports, it's an imperfect business structure. I mean the NBA playoffs have actually been pretty great the last few years, especially out West.
• HelloAgain

  There's nothing the NBA can do to stop it. I think the complaint is more with the players. Teaming up with your top competition to try and form super teams is standard bitch shit. Even the best player on the grade school playground knows he looks like a bitch if he tries to play with the other best players all the time.
• Azubuike24

  

  KB0938;1631469 wrote:Franchise tag would help, I agree with that

  A tag rule would be nice, but in most cases it would just mean a team gets stuck with a player who doesn't want to be there for 2 more years. I mean, imagine if Carmelo HAD to be with the Knicks for 2 more years, both of which they will continue to suck and get into prime cap position? Imagine if Dwight Howard would've been forced to be in Orlando for 2 more years? If you're a team, you don't want a cancer around AND pay him 20-25M a year. For what? A star is only worth star money if he's enhancing your entire franchise and team on the court. Players gravitating toward a big market and to want to play with other top players in said big market doesn't help.
• KB0938

  Azubuike24;1631470 wrote:It's a catch-22. A salary cap means certain teams can't use their revenue to pay players a bigger salary, and furthermore, teams retaining their own players can offer bigger and longer contracts. With that said, the salary cap only applies to the NBA and it doesn't regulate what players can make outside of the league. It basically means that any max contract in New York or Los Angeles has a much higher earning potential than one in Minnesota or Utah.
  
  Chris Bosh and Kevin Love are perfect examples. While neither are with amazing franchises, it was a pretty amicable end for both and both made it well-known they didn't want to be where their careers began.

  Well yeah of course the earning potential is more in a big market city. What would you propose? A smaller cap for big markets and a larger cap for small markets? Theres really not much you can do about it.
• IggyPride00

  

  The NBA created this problem when they tried to save themselves from themselves with this whole "max contract" idea.
  
  By completely taking market value out of the equation you enter so many other variables in that disadvantage undesirable places to play. If the money is a wash either way, most people would rather live on the coast than in Cleveland/Milwaukee.
  
  They need to dump the cookie cutter contracts and just give teams a cap and let them pay a player whatever they want. If Lebron is worth $40 million and is willing to stay with the Cavs knowing it cripples the Cavs then so be it. The fact they couldn't make him a competitive offer is why he and other stars leave because there is no real difference in money. He doesn't leave for $16 million if the Cavs could have offered him $30.
  
  The cookie cutter contracts have ruined the league. The NFL does it right. They have a cap but they also let you pay whoever you want whatever you want as long as you stay within the cap.
  
  That would end all this non-sense, but the league owners are so scared of overpayment that they thought the solution was to create an even bigger problem in the process. It is ridiculous.
• KB0938

  Letting them pay whatever they want wouldnt change a thing. Players could still take less money and play wherever htey wanted, just like now
• robj55

  

  KB0938;1631479 wrote:Letting them pay whatever they want wouldnt change a thing. Players could still take less money and play wherever htey wanted, just like now

  Which they should be able to do, it's a business.
• Azubuike24

  

  That would work, except what about the team with 5 million in cap space signing LeBron to a 7-year, 184 million dollar deal with it being only 4M in year 1 and 30M in the subsequent six years. Without standard raises and a slotted max deal, that team could then continually cash in on having LeBron, and pay the luxury tax every year after his first with the hundreds of millions of extra revenue they have.
  
  I hate the way the NBA designs contracts, but you can't just make it an open market. Heck, if anything, starting with the format the MLB has (funny, because it got lambasted for years) and implementing even more revenue sharing and compensation for signing players, you might have a winning system.
• IggyPride00

  

  KB0938;1631479 wrote:Letting them pay whatever they want wouldnt change a thing. Players could still take less money and play wherever htey wanted, just like now

  The differences in cash are too negligible to make a difference in the current system.
  
  You really think Lebron would have left $15-20 million a season on the table to go to Miami? Extremely doubtful. If the Cavs could have paid him whatever he would still be here most likely unless he just didn't care about money at all.
• IggyPride00

  

  Azubuike24;1631482 wrote:That would work, except what about the team with 5 million in cap space signing LeBron to a 7-year, 184 million dollar deal with it being only 4M in year 1 and 30M in the subsequent six years. Without standard raises and a slotted max deal, that team could then continually cash in on having LeBron, and pay the luxury tax every year after his first with the hundreds of millions of extra revenue they have.
  
  I hate the way the NBA designs contracts, but you can't just make it an open market. Heck, if anything, starting with the format the MLB has (funny, because it got lambasted for years) and implementing even more revenue sharing and compensation for signing players, you might have a winning system.

  That is easily taken care of by mandating that their can't be more than a 10-20% difference in pay for any contract from year 1 to the end. That easily solves the problem you mentioned.
  
  Without some kind of market force it is basically communism where all the unimportant shit gets maximized to the point it leads to certain decision making.
• Azubuike24

  

  Say the team with rights can pay him whatever and other teams are limited? The Cavs would have LeBron making 30 million a year (45-50% of the cap), getting more disgruntled each year because the other players on the roster can't cut it.
• KB0938

  robj55;1631481 wrote:Which they should be able to do, it's a business.

  Yeah, I mean I think its a bitch move teaming up like that. But its dealing their job/home/life and its well within the rules. And without Adam Silver being a dictator, theres really nothing you can do to stop it. And I dont hink people would like THe NBA telling them whos signing where and for how much and controlling absolutely everything
• Azubuike24

  

  IggyPride00;1631485 wrote:That is easily taken care of by mandating that their can't be more than a 10-20% difference in pay for any contract from year 1 to the end. That easily solves the problem you mentioned.
  
  Without some kind of market force it is basically communism where all the unimportant shit gets maximized to the point it leads to certain decision making.

  Why should a team be able to offer a guy an unlimited amount of total money but then not allocate when it can be paid? It sounds reasonable, but in the end, the owners would never go for it. As for the franchise tag, the players would never go for it.
  
  The best setup would be like the NFL, but the biggest problem with sports NOT named the NFL is all of them rely on the vast majority of the revenue coming from each franchise's sponsorships and affiliations. The NFL system could only work how it does when almost all of the revenue comes directly from the league's television deal and even things like ticket prices and merchandising are exclusively controlled by the league.
• robj55

  

  KB0938;1631487 wrote:Yeah, I mean I think its a bitch move teaming up like that. But its dealing their job/home/life and its well within the rules. And without Adam Silver being a dictator, theres really nothing you can do to stop it. And I dont hink people would like THe NBA telling them whos signing where and for how much and controlling absolutely everything

  Why should they not be able to play where they want? If an organization is good enough to make the moves and put themselves in position to land multiple big name free agents then more power to them, not everyone can do that. Will you think it's a bitch move if Melo goes to Chicago and teams up with DRose and Noah? The Bulls put themselves in position to possibly make that happen.
• IggyPride00

  

  Azubuike24;1631486 wrote:Say the team with rights can pay him whatever and other teams are limited? The Cavs would have LeBron making 30 million a year (45-50% of the cap), getting more disgruntled each year because the other players on the roster can't cut it.

  That's fine though. It would lead to a system where we have 1 real star a team, which is more in line with kind of the way it used to be. Guys would have to trade money vs. winning. The way it is now they can have both.
• robj55

  

  IggyPride00;1631493 wrote:That's fine though. It would lead to a system where we have 1 real star a team, which is more in line with kind of the way it used to be. Guys would have to trade money vs. winning. The way it is now they can have both.

  All great teams throughout NBA history have had multiple stars. I don't know where this train of thought came from that great teams in the 70's, 80's and 90's had only one star.
• IggyPride00

  

  robj55;1631501 wrote:All great teams throughout NBA history have had multiple stars. I don't know where this train of thought came from that great teams in the 70's, 80's and 90's had only one star.

  There are different levels of "star".
  
  Magic, Larry, Michael were different level of stars than their teammates.
  
  There is a difference between an All-star and a Super-Star.
• Laley23

  

  Pippen was better than Wade or Bosh though. No question. Hell, for what he did, Rodman was better than a lot of guys PF throughout history.