Believe or not, Chad Ford actually wrote a decent article on ESPN insider. The last few paragraphs got my attention: Johnson's firing continues talk of a trend toward the mass destruction of coaches in the league. An unprecedented 11 teams opened the 2003-04 season with a new head coach. Three have already been fired and several more -- Nate McMillan, Byron Scott and to a lesser extent, Don Chaney and Jim O'Brien -- look like they're on the hot seat. Last Thursday, Insider pointed the finger at the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The lethal combination of a hard cap, luxury tax and guaranteed contracts leave GMs with few options when their teams go south. Since we wrote the piece last week, several GMs have commented to Insider that they believe that NBA commish David Stern is going to push very hard to reduce the number of years a contract can be guaranteed for. "Right now it's seven and frankly, that's just too long," one GM said. "If a guy is 28 years old and in his prime when he signs it, he's 35 years old and probably way out of his prime when he's making the most money. With a hard cap and the luxury tax, that just kills a team." The plan, according to several GMs, will be to reduce the number of guaranteed years to five if a team is re-signing their own free agent. If a team is signing another team's free agent, the number would go down to four. Ideally, teams would love to implement the NFL's system that does away with guaranteed contracts all together. But with the CBA set to expire at the end of next season (the NBA picked up their option to extend the CBA for 2004-05 on Monday), the league knows that insisting on doing away with guarantees altogether would lead to a protracted labor war -- something neither side wants. Personally, I don't know if I can make it through another NBA labor stoppage, but something has to be done to avoid the Cato and Moochie type contracts. The problem is that the current agreement is benefitting both sides equally. The player are getting paid more than ever and the league is more profitable than ever. The number of guaranteed years should DEFINITELY be limited to four on a team's own free agents and three on other team's free agents. I never really understood the restricted free agent rule in the NBA, either. It's just a way for owners to avoid having to negotiate with a player. Either you're a free agent or you're not. The rookie salary scale is also an excellent idea, though it didn't serve it's original purpose, which was to cut down on high schoolers and underclassmen entering the draft...
Good points! I like the idea of reducing the number of years. Another option being thrown out in previous columns was the idea of being able to "purge" a huge contract each year or every other year in case a mistake is made either by the player being a dog or an injury situation. When I say a contract being purged I am saying that it would come off the "salary cap" but the contract would still be paid to the player. Basically it would give a team like the Magic a chance to rebuild. It would give GMs a "mulligan" on some of their more stupid contract signings. I am not sure this idea will pass. But the limited years on contracts certainly is a good idea.
Owners should simply get a clue. It's hilarious how they have to keep fighting for rules to keep themselves from spending money that they aren't forced too in the first pace. Hate me for saying it, but Donald Sterling did an ace job this summer. He brought back all but one guy he wanted, letting Odom walk when Miami overpayed him by double his worth. Compare that to Rod Thorn handing out welfare to Zo in the form of 22 mill (w/o insurance coverage) for 4 years no one in the league expected him to play. Kidd getting the max for 7 years wasa also a mistake, I promise you. He was worth it the last 2 years, but he won't be for any more than 2 or 3 of those 7 he signed for. His knee is going south in a hurry, and it's not like he's 27 or 28..... Look at how many bad contracts are finally coming off the books - Howard, Pippen, etc last summer and Rasheed Wallace this year. Salaries are becoming more realistic and should continue to do so. Limiting the max like this will only mean MORE FAs each summer and more times a player is going to insist on getting overpaid. Bad move. You're replacing one 7 year deal with 2 5-year deals in a lot of cases. Do the math. Evan
Nobody is suggesting limiting the length of contracts, just the length of guaranteed money. These players are asking for these six and seven year deals. The owners have to pay them, or risk losing the player to another team. If he doesn't pay, he's branded as "cheap". Players can sign a seven year deal, it's just that they'll have to earn the last three years of it. If they don't pay up to par, then they become free agents. They won't get overpaid, because their subpar play is the reason the contract wasn't extended in the first place, unless an owner is just stupid to sign him for a big raise, in which case it is the owner's fault. You can't, however, put the blame on all the owners for a few bad contracts that were handed out
It's simple - put in a team option after 5 years when you write the contracts. Same thing, and won't cause a labor stoppage. Evan
Players Union would fight a team option at the 5th year more than a contract length limit. If the league wants to shorten contracts (or contract guarantees) they'll have to increase the max salary, I'd think. The length is very important to players because it gives them long-term security. They don't have to worry about career-ending injuries or whatnot. How many times have we seen players pass up a bigger paycheck to get more years (like Mobley or Jim Jackson). So, to get the union to consent, the league is going to have to give them a bone. Btw, while Sterling may run a profitable organization, his teams will always suck. And, the only reason he can run his team the way he does is because everyone else is trying to win.
