The upcoming salary crunch: overpaying mediocre talent

[greymatter]

Whenever a team pays trash like Shumpbert 10M/year, bad shit happens. Shump had a 8.5 PER this past season. He can't handle the ball, can't shoot, and makes bad decisions with the ball. His offensive ineptitude grossly outweighs his defensive impact.

This trend will cause teams to be extremely top-heavy in their salary management. A player of Tristan Thompson's caliber in this upcoming FA market would command 20+M per year while Lebron will get ~30M/year. Imagine players along the calibers of Nikola Vucevic, Ryan Anderson, Victor Olidipo, Rudy Gobert, etc all looking at mediocre to below average talents getting 10 and 18M/year contracts when the salary cap was ~64M. How much do you think their agents will be demanding when the cap goes to 94M this year and then 107M the year after?

I sure as hell don't want to see "elite" teams built around 1 star, 2-3 barely above average players, and 8+ league minimum types of DLeague and over-the-hill ring chasers. The owners would be smart to negotiate a new CBA which limits their team team to 1 player making no more than 30% of the cap, a 2nd player capped at 20%, and everyone else capped at no more than 10%. This restriction makes sure that only NBA royalty gets paid the big bucks. It would also prevent the NBA from completely destroying its "middle class".

[D-Wait]

If only Shump could find his range back, was hitting shots in the 2014/15 season...
Anyway, 10 mill./year will propably be the floor for any 3-and-D guy now (albeit an average to bad one in Shump)

[DMAVS41]

Whenever a team pays trash like Shumpbert 10M/year, bad shit happens. Shump had a 8.5 PER this past season. He can't handle the ball, can't shoot, and makes bad decisions with the ball. His offensive ineptitude grossly outweighs his defensive impact.

This trend will cause teams to be extremely top-heavy in their salary management. A player of Tristan Thompson's caliber in this upcoming FA market would command 20+M per year while Lebron will get ~30M/year. Imagine players along the calibers of Nikola Vucevic, Ryan Anderson, Victor Olidipo, Rudy Gobert, etc all looking at mediocre to below average talents getting 10 and 18M/year contracts when the salary cap was ~64M. How much do you think their agents will be demanding when the cap goes to 94M this year and then 107M the year after?

I sure as hell don't want to see "elite" teams built around 1 star, 2-3 barely above average players, and 8+ league minimum types of DLeague and over-the-hill ring chasers. The owners would be smart to negotiate a new CBA which limits their team team to 1 player making no more than 30% of the cap, a 2nd player capped at 20%, and everyone else capped at no more than 10%. This restriction makes sure that only NBA royalty gets paid the big bucks. It would also prevent the NBA from completely destroying its "middle class".

But teams aren't all stupid. The Cavs paying Shump last year was calculated with the increase coming. The Cavs knew it was an overpay at the time that would look better and better the next two years.

Now? Shump at 10 million a year is a bargain given the next two increases coming.

That was actually a great contract factoring in where the cap was headed and for what situation they were in.

The cap system works for all intensive purposes....you get a better chance at keeping a team together and keeping your own players...and players get paid left and right.

Bad contracts still hurt...and obtaining assets can alter the path of a franchise.

Smart money still wins out.

It's not fair because Lebron and Curry and Durant and WB...etc...they are getting max money...and other far worse players are getting max money. So if Lebron and Joe Johnson (previously) get paid the same...obviously there is an inherent imbalance, but this system isn't bad.

The smart teams will figure out ways to get solid contracts for guys like Aminu and Crowder and Bradley....etc. And the dumb teams will chase big fish and either miss...or pay too much at times.

Basically...what the Mavs do...they suck at this...always have...smart teams do the exact opposite.

[greymatter]

But teams aren't all stupid. The Cavs paying Shump last year was calculated with the increase coming. The Cavs knew it was an overpay at the time that would look better and better the next two years.

Now? Shump at 10 million a year is a bargain given the next two increases coming.

That was actually a great contract factoring in where the cap was headed and for what situation they were in.

So long as Shump is as bad as he played this past season, he will always be a horrible contract. 8.5 PER means you are not only hurting your team by being on the floor, you're hurting it by a lot. You can get better production out of a Dleager on a 10-day contract.



The cap system works for all intensive purposes....you get a better chance at keeping a team together and keeping your own players...and players get paid left and right.

The cap in its current form overpays for mediocre talent because there will always be at least 1 team that does something stupid out of desperation to fill a void. Once that happens, agents use it as leverage and it creates an avalanche.



Bad contracts still hurt...and obtaining assets can alter the path of a franchise.

Smart money still wins out.

Not every team can be like SA, getting their aging stars to take huge pay cuts. It's not "smart money" when that happens. It's being lucky enough to have players loyal to a franchise to the point that they put their team above their own financial well-being.


It's not fair because Lebron and Curry and Durant and WB...etc...they are getting max money...and other far worse players are getting max money. So if Lebron and Joe Johnson (previously) get paid the same...obviously there is an inherent imbalance, but this system isn't bad.

The smart teams will figure out ways to get solid contracts for guys like Aminu and Crowder and Bradley....etc. And the dumb teams will chase big fish and either miss...or pay too much at times.

Basically...what the Mavs do...they suck at this...always have...smart teams do the exact opposite.

The only thing not fair is that one team's stupidity essentially creates a cascading effect which artificially inflates the salaries of undeserving players. The current system ends up causing teams to pay 3 players 75-80% of the cap space while the 9+ other players are left fighting for scraps. Yeah, they're all millionaires (can't feel too sorry for them), but you wind up creating a huge underclass and virtually no middle class. Right now, it makes perfect sense for those out of the top 8-9 rotation to be minimum contracts. The problem is that it is filtering up. It will start coming to the point where your 7th-8th man in the rotation will need to be near league minimum in order for teams to be able to retain their mediocre level starting talent.

What will happen is that you'll have slightly above average talent causing the mediocre to slightly below average talent to have to take huge pay cuts in order for them to have a team to play for.

It's bad for the league and owners as a whole are too stupid for their own good and need to be protected from themselves.

[DMAVS41]

So long as Shump is as bad as he played this past season, he will always be a horrible contract. 8.5 PER means you are not only hurting your team by being on the floor, you're hurting it by a lot. You can get better production out of a Dleager on a 10-day contract.



The cap in its current form overpays for mediocre talent because there will always be at least 1 team that does something stupid out of desperation to fill a void. Once that happens, agents use it as leverage and it creates an avalanche.



Not every team can be like SA, getting their aging stars to take huge pay cuts. It's not "smart money" when that happens. It's being lucky enough to have players loyal to a franchise to the point that they put their team above their own financial well-being.



The only thing not fair is that one team's stupidity essentially creates a cascading effect which artificially inflates the salaries of undeserving players. The current system ends up causing teams to pay 3 players 75-80% of the cap space while the 9+ other players are left fighting for scraps. Yeah, they're all millionaires (can't feel too sorry for them), but you wind up creating a huge underclass and virtually no middle class. Right now, it makes perfect sense for those out of the top 8-9 rotation to be minimum contracts. The problem is that it is filtering up. It will start coming to the point where your 7th-8th man in the rotation will need to be near league minimum in order for teams to be able to retain their mediocre level starting talent.

What will happen is that you'll have slightly above average talent causing the mediocre to slightly below average talent to have to take huge pay cuts in order for them to have a team to play for.

It's bad for the league and owners as a whole are too stupid for their own good and need to be protected from themselves.

Agreed about Shump, but he's a better player than he showed this year. This was the worst basketball of his career. He's not this bad...

Agreed...it overpays mediocre talent at times. It also allows smart teams to grossly underpay even good players. Just look at some of the contracts handed out recently. IT's contract is a joke how good it is for the Celtics. So is Crowder's contract. Aminu's contract is very nice. Teams can strike quickly in free agency and not wait for prices to get driven up. Also, teams don't have to take on bad money if they don't want to. Hence why it's a difficult job to run a team and it's a complicated process. Smart money still wins out though.

You earn the loyalty of players as well. I agree that of course some of it is luck getting a Dirk or Duncan, but franchises also earn a reputation like any business. There is a reason I get my suits cleaned at my place...I've never had a problem in 10 years. The Spurs have built up a reputation over decades...and it pays dividends. This is fair...and is how it should be.

Stupid teams create value in other things. Smart people and franchises find ways to capitalize on the stupidity of others. I see no reason to think there aren't ways to exploit what you deem the stupidity of certain franchises.

Is the system perfect? Of course not, but it allows most players to get paid...and in the end it's not about the superstars...they get paid off the court so much that the money on the court in terms of the differences we are discussing just aren't large enough to resonate. The union wants to make sure it thrives as a whole.

It's also a system that generates a ton of excitement during free agency in a way that no other american sports league does....and gives each franchise a ton of flexibility in determining how they want to build their team.