Rule: If a team offers the max to a player that is currently on their team or played on their team at the end of last year, that offer cannot be rejected. Basically it would allow teams to retain players that they drafted and groomed or specifically traded for purpose. Perhaps you could limit this to one player per roster. I'm from the school of creating parity. I can definitely understand if you are for super teams you will probably not like this idea.
How would you like it if the first company that you worked for had the right to keep you at that company forever, no matter where you wanted to work?
If players won't agree to a franchise tag, they certainly won't agree to this. Nor should they, since it's pure lunacy. In addition, if you thought tanking is bad now, enact this rule, Sixers will become the norm.
there is more parity now than there has ever been. you don't see teams going back2back or back2back2back as much anymore. the Western conference is FULL of parity. the Heat would have been the 3rd or 4th best team in the West last year. the 80s, 90s, and early 2000's were the real "super teams"
The company here would be the NBA. If the player wants to go play in China or Europe they would be welcome to leave. Your point fails. As long as the player wants to be hired by the NBA, your analogy does not apply.
They don't work for the nba, they sign contracts with the respective teams, and each of those teams is also a 1/30th owner of the nba. The D League on the other hand is as you imply and works similar to how you're thinking.
You can make the same analogy within a company. How would you like it if the first regional office that you worked at had the right to keep you at that regional office as long as you were at that company, no matter where you wanted to work? (Oh, and that company was a federally-permitted monopoly and the only available employer of people with your skill-set and elite abilities in the nation.) In other words, this isn't about people who want parity vs people who want superteams. This is about people who think workers should be free to choose the conditions of their work vs those who don't find it particularly important.
Harden was on the Rockets when he got the max. Had the Thunder offered him the max (as an extension), then he might still be there. The reason we got him was that they were trying to sell him short...
While I agree he might still be there. Part of me thinks that harden really wanted his own team. Seeing as how he has inserted himself as team leader of this USA team I'm even more convinced of that. Their is great parity right now. The super teams we're the 90's 2000's because every great young player left to get his own team and try and be like MJ. Kobe forced Shaq out that would never happen now. Tmac left Vince to be the man. Stephon Marbury left KG cause he wasn't the guy. Harden seem like a Kobe type mentality to me we're he thinks he is better than everyone and I'm fine with that because hi really does have an impressive skill set on offense.
How would you like it if the company you worked for was unable to fire you for years regardless of your job performance? Players in the NBA give up certain things, and they receive other things in return. On balance, it's a pretty good deal for the players.
This. I've always believed that the analogy of normal employees working for normal companies fails because of (1) the NBA being a monopoly, (2) guaranteed contracts, and (3) insanely high salaries. None of these conditions exist in a normal work environment.
Well either way, a 'max rule' from his own team would not have stopped Harden from leaving. He got traded because OKC were not going to offer the max... so he got sent to us, and after a year his max contract began.
I just prefer to remove the max contract. Let teams offer 55 million/year for LeBron. If you want parity, that's how you get it.
This is the only way you'll truly have parity, unless these stars are just hellbent on playing together and money doesn't matter (highly doubtful).
Doesn't have to be hard cap. Keep the cap like it is, we'll see if Lebron is willing to wait a few years of crap players to be able to trade for talent, and if the owner is willing to go deep into Lux Tax on top of that. I'd love to see no Max, with as important as 1 player is to any franchise it doesn't make sense for Lebron and Durant to make less than Joe Johnson, Amare, and Melo
I learned about this idea in world history in sixth grade; the workers were called indentured servants. Definitely forward thinking.
Really? Indentured servitude? You would learn about indentured servitude in US History. No wonder you don't know jack about it.
