NBA fans welcome.

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Also, I think the NBA (and MLB) need a hard salary cap. Not something too low like 65 million that affects most teams. I'd like to see everything stay in place (soft cap at 60 million, tax at 70 million), but I'd like to add a hard cap at around 80-85 million. A level just high enough to stop the likes of the lakers, Knicks, nets, and heat while scaring off others.

This would help prevent things like the lakers "super" team and the nets spending a bajillion dollars on players, while not hurting the mid market teams who only want to be in that 65-75 million range.

Unfortunately this will probably never happen, while it would create more competitive balance (something the NBA needs IMO), it would dip into ownership pocket books because every team under the tax, gets a share of the money collected from over the tax teams.

It really shows how the NBA is a business and even something that would be good for the competitive aspect of the game is affected by the greediness of some cheap owners.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
doomiedee said:
Smh oh I'd figure he'd go back to okc after last season. I think that was a stupid trade for both teams. Okc should franchise durant, Westbrook and harden. I think that trio has the pontential to dethrone the big three in mia


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...

Harden signed a 5 year contract upon completion of the trade to Houston. Hes not going back ever. The trade was because OKC didnt want to meet his asking price. He ended up signing that contract with Houston that was only worth like 5 mil more total. Hard to believe they broke up thier big 3 over 5 mil

Howeved, OKC did not fall off. The Westbrook injury doomed them last year and in turn not having harden to take over the minutes hurt them but make no mistake, last years team was still dangerous until Westbrook went down.

cmsbthebest said:
Just a lil bit of Nate rob comments (I know it's a little late)

He's a very fun player to watch, however, he is not a starter for a championship team, he is not a starter for a playoff team. He is perfect for the 20 mins a game spark plug role. Tibs hatted playing him a ton, but had no other choice because other than Boozer, who else could score on the bulls?

I'd assume Brian shaw will run the triangle in Denver, where Nate won't be really effective, because he constantly needs the ball in his hands. I feel like he could for sure struggle this year to adjusting to a new offensive philosophy.

Regarding defense, Nate just doesn't have the size to compete with other nba point guards. If he was bigger, he would be a fine defensive player. The problem is that most guards can shoot over him without problems (although he is really pesky).


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...

Finally someone not looking through midget tainted glasses. That was CRAZY talk last night.
 
I think the tax situation is fine. You can't even build a super team by just signing players. You have to potentially tank and then acquire the players when you have salary space. You can't just go offer a player who's not already on your team a max contract without cap room. Otherwise Portland, Dallas and NJ would be more relevant.
 
I see similarities between JJ Barea and Nate Robinson, both good small spark plugs off the bench. Starters, no, but they are the players that really help out playoff and championship teams.


Both big chuckers tho ha
 
cmsbthebest said:
Also, I think the NBA (and MLB) need a hard salary cap. Not something too low like 65 million that affects most teams. I'd like to see everything stay in place (soft cap at 60 million, tax at 70 million), but I'd like to add a hard cap at around 80-85 million. A level just high enough to stop the likes of the lakers, Knicks, nets, and heat while scaring off others.

This would help prevent things like the lakers "super" team and the nets spending a bajillion dollars on players, while not hurting the mid market teams who only want to be in that 65-75 million range.

Unfortunately this will probably never happen, while it would create more competitive balance (something the NBA needs IMO), it would dip into ownership pocket books because every team under the tax, gets a share of the money collected from over the tax teams.

It really shows how the NBA is a business and even something that would be good for the competitive aspect of the game is affected by the greediness of some cheap owners.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...


Very good points, its been said over and over again that the NBA does not have enough competition from small market teams. I mean just look at the facts, I think it is only like 9 separate teams have won a championship in the last 25 years or something (don't quote me on that). An incentive needs to be placed on small market teams for not only retain superstars but attract them...
 
schulace123 said:
Very good points, its been said over and over again that the NBA does not have enough competition from small market teams. I mean just look at the facts, I think it is only like 9 separate teams have won a championship in the last 25 years or something (don't quote me on that). An incentive needs to be placed on small market teams for not only retain superstars but attract them...
Click to expand...

Wrong

San Antonio spurs. OKC. Indiana. Plenty of good small market teams. Its just that some cities are destination cities. Nothing to do with the market. You can't erase the Lakers or Boston's history. You can't change that Orlando and Miami have tax advantages. You can't erase the shadow Jordan placed over Chicago. You can't change that NY is the media capital of the world.

Everyone else needs to look at SA and OKC and GS and build properly. It starts in the front office and a commitment to winning. The other franchises will always attract free agents but small markets are not hopeless
 
ballinouttacntrol said:
Wrong

San Antonio spurs. OKC. Indiana. Plenty of good small market teams. Its just that some cities are destination cities. Nothing to do with the market. You can't erase the Lakers or Boston's history. You can't change that Orlando and Miami have tax advantages. You can't erase the shadow Jordan placed over Chicago. You can't change that NY is the media capital of the world.

Everyone else needs to look at SA and OKC and GS and build properly. It starts in the front office and a commitment to winning. The other franchises will always attract free agents but small markets are not hopeless
Click to expand...

One little correction, GS isn't a small market, little known fact is that they're in the 6th biggest market


Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom