With Europe owners ready to pounce on NBA talent with loads of money, do you think Stern will eliminate the Salary Cap?
I don't think you can. It would be horribly unfair to smaller market teams if they eliminate the salary cap. It's tough for them right now, but at least having a luxury tax threshold keeps most bigger market teams in check.
I agree with what your saying, although he may have to if push comes to shove and the Europe owners open their pockets
Teams in New York or LA would dominate. Not that eliminating the salary cap would harm me in any way (I'm a Laker fan), it generally wouldn't be good for the NBA, because like Moo said, small market teams would struggle. Say goodbye to Milwaukee, Indiana, Oklahoma City, Charlotte, San Antonio, and etc. They won't be able to keep up. The NBA would turn into MLB, with your big market teams (like the Yankees) buying superstars every year and the small market teams having to trade away their young talent before their rookie contract ends because they cannot afford to shell out big bucks. I like the NBA the way it is, because at least it can remain somewhat competitive for the most part.
I really don't think he has anything to worry about, to be honest. I don't foresee any big-namers going overseas to play for the money. What they make in the NBA is more than enough, and the level of competition is much greater. The latter is likely good enough to keep the superstars over here, as most of them would probably play for less money and better competition. However, I do think we're going to see an influx of those middle-tiered, Josh Childress-esque players go over. They'll be considered the cream of the crop over there and get a lot more money than what they'd ever get here.
Yeah, i don't think it is a "market thing". It's an "owner thing". Portland is small, but our owner has bank! I hope he does get rid of it. We'd win a championship every year!
I like the NBA as it is, and no matter what, the NBA will always be the top of the world when it comes to basketball. People come here to play because of the name and history that NBA carries with it. The legends. But other than that I agree with Moo.
It'd hurt you too. As you pointed out some teams would fold. But beyond that ticket prices would go up, more games would move to premium channels, the cost of those channels would be up... At the end the cost of teams are passed down to the fans. Most owners aren't paying out of pocket to fund teams. -Petey
If enough players head overseas, and rookies drafted in un-desirable spots/round head overseas it will ultimately effect the level of talent. That's not a good thing either. -Petey
I think this could be cool. Remove the salary cap, and have a much harsher luxury tax. As in let the Knicks spend 240 million on 12 players (20 million each), and bill them a 2 dollar tax on everything spent over 40 million. Then split that 400 million tax bill with the other 29 other teams. Over time, and other teams over the cap, there will be enough money for teams to sign their premium players without a hard cap. -Petey
That wouldn't hurt the Lakers because every year ticket prices increase, and every year, we still sell tickets and are the leaders in NBA attendance. Most Laker fans who go to the games on regular basis will continue to go because to a lot of those fans, money isn't even an issue. You have guys who go to Laker games to take a nap or just to hang out for the night because they have nothing else to do. That's why Staples Center is quiet most of the times, because real fans cannot afford the high ticket prices, while the richies can. And we are still the leaders in attendence. Also, if games move to premium channels, and the cost rises, it effects every single team in the league, even the small markets. Which is why having a team in LA or New York, or other big markets help. Jerry Buss also isn't afraid to shell out some money to help the team win, and unlike the Chicago Bulls, he was willing to pay luxury tax to get the Gasol deal done.
I hate the salary cap and I'd argue it's ruined the quality of the NBA. I don't think the salary cap benefits small market teams at all. Aside from the Spurs what other small market team has really benefitted? Besides the Spurs have had success because of timing. They were fortunate to land Tim Duncan in the draft to pair alongside David Robinson, and at the same time they had cap flexibility the same season the NBA enacted the salary cap. If the salary cap wasn't available when Duncan was set to sign his first long term contract, he might be making close to $30M a season or he might have been a different team by pricing himself out of San Antonio. I think he was close to signing with the Magic at one point. Granted the Spurs have been pioneers in tapping into the International pool of players and they've also been masterful at managing the salary cap. I think they've benefitted the most from being able to build through the draft and having a head start on a winning blue print. The salary cap forces teams to water down their rosters instead of giving teams the opportunity to pair stars with other stars. The league might be more competitive, but it's a lower standard of competition. Last year the Celtics dominated the league being able to have a Big Three. Back in the 80's all the playoff teams had their version of a Big 3 and it was a better brand of basketball. I do like the rookie salary cap because it gives a franchise a chance to develop their rookies without breaking the bank on "potential." I don't think Stern will ever lift the cap and I doubt the owners would ever vote to abolish it because they make more by having a budget in place.
So this doesn't effect you? Won't you want to be able to go to 5~10 games at a reasonable price? I meant like Paul Allens' Blazer channel, MSG's Knicks channel, Nets' YES Network. What if more teams went to those channels and decided to charge viewers 25$ a month? Sure some would pay as ticket prices are way out of the range of afford-ability, but how does paying a premium on just watching games now effect people? -Petey
Of course I would. But there is no reasonable price. Tickets for Laker games are not reasonable, and it's not like I go to 5 or 10 games every year. I've been to like one Laker game my entire life, so raising ticket prices won't effect me. Those who can afford to go to Laker games now probably will still be able to afford to go to Laker games in the future, price rise or not. Like I said before, ticket prices rise every single year for Laker games, even when we miss the playoffs or get eliminated in the first round. It still doesn't stop the attendance, and I don't envision it ever will. So basically the NBA would be sort of like boxing, and turn in pay per view? I don't see it happening. MLB has no salary cap, and it has never been a problem. Even if something like this takes place, I doubt it would effect me because I'm sure the Buss family will come up with something so that everyone on the LA area can watch Laker games with no extra charge. He's raking in enough revenue from all the high prices he's charging for tickets.
Didn't Stern just said half of the team isn't making money? That would mean lifting the cap would kill them However I'm all for lifting the cap. Imagine what Morey could get with no cap.. if he got Artest pretty much for free, imagine what else he could've gotten with all that extra cash if the cap is gone. Oh wait... the Rockets has a really cheap owner. nevermind. Teams like Blazers, Lakers, and especially Dallas would be sharing the trading trophies every other year if the cap is gone.
