![]() Players’ salaries are sometimes based on their previous salaries under cap rules. Not that that would have been enough for the players to favor cap smoothing. At minimum, it seems likely the NBA would have distributed the rest of the 49%-51% of BRI to players not earned in traditional salary. She implies the league proposed artificially lowering the cap (which, again, is determined by formula based on revenue) for the first year or two of the new national TV deals without offering the players something in return. It’s impossible to evaluate whether Roberts was right without knowing the particulars of the NBA’s smoothing plan. But I didn’t see any chorus of support from any of the owners. Not a single owner came up to me and suggested that they thought we should do this. I don’t think a single player does either. Independent of each other and not knowing what either of us felt, they both came almost saying, “Are you kidding? Why would you do this?” But what we did to make sure it wasn’t just Michele’s instinct was hire two separate economists to tell us whether this was something that was going to be of value to our players in the long run. It was an absurd suggestion, I thought personally. Why in the world would players pretend that the game was not making as much money and therefore have smaller contracts? They were going to enjoy real money that reflected where we were financially as a game. There was going to be no smoothing of the owners’ profits at all. ![]() I delight and the players delight in reading about some of these contracts because they know they absolutely deserve it. No, in fact it’s completely confirmed the correctness of that position. When the salary explosion happened and you rejected the smoothing idea that the NBA proposed, has anything that has happened in the last few years caused you to reconsider that stance? Roberts, in a Q&A with Paul Flannery of SB Nation: National Basketball Players Association executive director Michele Roberts, um, has not. NBA commissioner Adam Silver has looked back longingly, wishing the union approved. That way, all players – not just 2016 free agents – would cash in. Players would have gotten less than 49%-51% of BRI in salary, but presumably, the league would have distributed the difference to players after-the-fact. With cap smoothing, the NBA would have set an artificially lower cap for 2016-17. (There are procedures if teams fall short or pay too much.) The salary cap is set so teams’ payrolls collectively reach that range. Players get 49%-51% of Basketball Related Income (BRI) each year, the precise amount determined by formula. The problem was predictable, and the NBA proposed a solution at the time – cap smoothing. With so many lucrative long-term 2016 contracts still on the books, free agents the following few years haven’t gotten and won’t get comparable compensation. It went up to just $99.093 million last year and is projected to reach only $101 million this year and $108 million next year. Free agents cashed in majorly that summer.īut now, the cap is leveling off. In 2016, new national TV contracts pushed the NBA’s salary cap from $70 million to $94.143 million – a larger jump than over the entire previous decade.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |