For everyone complaining about players rejecting cap smoothing

Click on this tweet and read the entirety of the thread. Michelle Roberts and the Players Union had zero understanding of the ramifications of a cap spike. It's equally on the owners for having no understanding as well and agreeing to this.

 

This is BS. KD was up 3-1 and then joined the team he lost to. Its not like the thunder were a bad team. So CP3 and LBJ should a decision on some b**** move by KD?

 

KD does not join the Warriors without the cap spike, unless he was willing to take the minimum to do it. That's just a fact. It was unquestionably a lame move, but it was allowed because of the cap spike.

 

Doesn’t this also mean Harden never comes to Houston?

 

this had nothing to do with the cap spike. hes been here since 2012 before all of this

 

Wasn’t sure had to ask.

 

basically it came down to the spike in 2016. the reason why KD was able to fit into GS the way he did is bc the spike allowed enough room for GS to add his salary albeit he took a slight paycut to do so. It was also a lame FA decision but thats just obvious. Bc there other guys like klay/dg signed their extensions before the spike so their salaries at the time were fine and continue to be until the end. Curry was also into his multi year contract that was very much underpaid being the mvp. granted he signed it still with ongoing questions about his ankle etc.

This is where the talk of them being able to stay together after the next couple of years comes from. Bc now with all the money out there after these contracts are up, are they still going to take these same discounts.

some believe they will, some believe they wont. Championships do change alot of things

 

lol no I knew about KD

 

didn't seem that way since you thought harden's situation was related to KD's

 

while i agree everyone was an idiot in this situation, especially silver, the players want max contracts as much as the owners. well, maybe not exactly as much. all 30 owners want it and maybe 440 out of 450 players want it. basically just the 10 superstar level players want there to be no max contract (outside of kd who would sign for anything on a stacked team).

 

unless you have something to the contrary, my understanding of the owners' proposal was simply that the players would sign into an artificially lowered cap, to avoid crazy changes to team-building (exactly what happened), and then the difference between what they collectively signed for and their guaranteed collective portion of BRI would simply go to all of the players proportional to their contracts.

how the nbpa could come up with an analysis where all of the players getting 51% of BRI in a non-smoothing world somehow resulted in players getting less money than the players getting 51% of BRI in a smoothing world just sounds like posturing and optics (it sounds like less money so we're not for it, wah wah wah).

at the time, everyone said the players who were free agents that offseason would suck up all the money from players in future offseasons, and as we've seen this year with the league-wide dearth of cap space, that's exactly what happened.

if either side actually didn't know what was going to happen, when a 5 second look at the situation made it clear exactly what would happen, then they probably shouldn't have their jobs. the easier explanation is they simply didn't care to fix it.

 

For the owners to raise the cap before the revenue means they would have had to front money they didn't necessarily all have in cash. It's silly.

The proposal that was on the table for the players would have split the extra money amongst all the players proportionally - they'd still get their share of BRI. The owners weren't trying to pocket it. But instead of it all going to the players who happened to be free agents in the 1-2 years after the spike, the money would have been more evenly divided.

 

The end result of cap smoothing was that the money the players get would still be roughly the same - it would just get distributed differently. The goal was solely to fix that free agency year in 2016 so a handful of mediocre players didn't suddenly sign huge deals. Within a couple of years, the cap would be the same as it is now. It's definitely possible Harden would have gotten a smaller extension due to the smaller cap, but that was part of the point - to reduce the amount that people got who happened to get contracts in year 1 and 2 of the new cap, while distributing some of that money to the players who weren't lucky enough to be free agents or eligible for extensions those years.

 

i'm not an expert, by my understanding is that the players get between 49-51% of BRI, and the 49-51 number is based on league-wide BRI and nothing to do with salaries. if the league makes less money than expected, they get 49%, it if makes more, they get 51%. i believe they have always gotten 51% since the new cba started. either way, the smoothed cap is just a made up number. the players would still get whatever number between 49-51% would be appropriate based on league-wide BRI, just more evenly distributed.

and yes, i didn't think of the fact that max contracts would be lower over the course of the contract, but that's still the point. to distribute the money evenly instead of just to the free agency class of 2016.

 

.....no?

 

Super late...been answered