14 replies to this topic

[BeBoutBidness]

Wasn't the lockout supposed to help smaller market teams be more competitive? It seems the new CBA will hurt more than help. OKC and Memphis lost James Harden and Rudy Gay this season while the LA Lakers were able to add Dwight Howard and Steve Nash. NY, Brooklyn, LA, Boston, and teams of that nature can go over the tax line because of lucrative local TV deals while smaller market teams have to make sure they stay under the tax line. It seems like more of the same to me rather than helping the little guys out.

[IdrinkGuinness]

Lin,asik too.

It does help small market owners if they are under the lux tax.

[gamecocks11]

I would like to know where the money we collect from being under the tax goes. Pockets or invested back into the business?

[gandalfill0]

BeBoutBidness, on 01 February 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

Wasn't the lockout supposed to help smaller market teams be more competitive? It seems the new CBA will hurt more than help. OKC and Memphis lost James Harden and Rudy Gay this season while the LA Lakers were able to add Dwight Howard and Steve Nash. NY, Brooklyn, LA, Boston, and teams of that nature can go over the tax line because of lucrative local TV deals while smaller market teams have to make sure they stay under the tax line. It seems like more of the same to me rather than helping the little guys out.

No.

You were not paying attention.

Lockout was supposed to help smaller markets be profitable, not competitive.

Regardless of that, we are still in the adjustment phase... Even though they "can" pay it for as long as they want, tax hit for the Lakers, for example, at their current payroll once the repeater and full "multipliers" of the tax system are in place will be so high that they won't want to pay it anyway. I would wait for a few years to see if it helps or it doesn't.

In the end I believe it will sort of spread the talent a bit more, making "three max players" team less common. Which is not that bad, but it will take a while.

[BeBoutBidness]

gandalfill0, on 01 February 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

No. You were not paying attention. Lockout was supposed to help smaller markets be profitable, not competitive. Regardless of that, we are still in the adjustment phase... Even though they "can" pay it for as long as they want, tax hit for the Lakers, for example, at their current payroll once the repeater and full "multipliers" of the tax system are in place will be so high that they won't want to pay it anyway. I would wait for a few years to see if it helps or it doesn't. In the end I believe it will sort of spread the talent a bit more, making "three max players" team less common. Which is not that bad, but it will take a while.

I was just about to post this

[fanboyslim]

What the above posters said. The lockout was all about the money, not about competition or putting a good product on the court.

To be fair, shortly after the CBA was signed and the lockout finished the owners reached an agreement on the revenue sharing system, which redistributes money from larger to smaller markets regardless of their salary/tax situation. This is obviously better than before but still completely unaffected by the CBA and the salary / roster decisions.

So, bottom line, the owners get a bigger percentage of the money as a whole, small market teams get a bigger slice of the big maket revenues, everybody gets equally hammered by the new punitive tax rules, big market teams still have the upper hand because they still have more money overall.

[Griz Nizzle In Da Hizzle]

Competitive parity has never been an objective of the NBA business model. The new CBA helps small market teams limit operating losses, as long as they remain under the lux cap threshold. Which will inherently widen the competitive divide.

[Acehigh718]

gandalfill0, on 01 February 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Lockout was supposed to help smaller markets be profitable, not competitive.

Yahtzee!

[GrizzedByBluffCity]

that's why the hardcap was never discussed.

[Grizzled Vet]

The problem was not signing Rudy at a much lower price than they did.
The problem was having Marc Gasol, and still drafting Thabeet when other studs were available.
Ditto on the huge ZBo contract.

I believe the Pau Gasol was a great move, but some of the moves after that, especially those with Heisley's involvement, is what really hurt.

First round draft picks that the Grizzlies let walk (or guys that were attained with first rounder):
OJ Mayo, Ronnie Brewer, Hasheem Thabeet & DeMarre Carroll (also cost a 1st rounder in Battier deal), Dominique Jones

Smaller market teams have to be smarter.

[BeBoutBidness]

Grizzled Vet, on 01 February 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

The problem was not signing Rudy at a much lower price than they did. The problem was having Marc Gasol, and still drafting Thabeet when other studs were available. Ditto on the huge ZBo contract. I believe the Pau Gasol was a great move, but some of the moves after that, especially those with Heisley's involvement, is what really hurt. First round draft picks that the Grizzlies let walk (or guys that were attained with first rounder): OJ Mayo, Ronnie Brewer, Hasheem Thabeet & DeMarre Carroll (also cost a 1st rounder in Battier deal), Dominique Jones Smaller market teams have to be smarter.

+1

[IdrinkGuinness]

Grizzled Vet, on 01 February 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

The problem was not signing Rudy at a much lower price than they did.
The problem was having Marc Gasol, and still drafting Thabeet when other studs were available.
Ditto on the huge ZBo contract.

I believe the Pau Gasol was a great move, but some of the moves after that, especially those with Heisley's involvement, is what really hurt.

First round draft picks that the Grizzlies let walk (or guys that were attained with first rounder):
OJ Mayo, Ronnie Brewer, Hasheem Thabeet & DeMarre Carroll (also cost a 1st rounder in Battier deal), Dominique Jones

Smaller market teams have to be smarter.

Right and trading Rudy was a smart move.
Now we have to make more smart moves.

[Grizzled Vet]

IdrinkGuinness, on 01 February 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Right and trading Rudy was a smart move. Now we have to make more smart moves.

Too early to judge this move, either way.
Having a low payroll, and a lot of great role players, might just get the team "Best Lottery Team" at the end of a few seasons.

I don't think they'll be able to land a top 30 player as a free agent without significantly overpaying.

[IdrinkGuinness]

We have 2 top 30 players

[chipc3]

The new collective bargaining agreement was intended to help small market teams make a profit. It had nothing at all to do with making them more competitive.