teams like the Golden State, the two LA and NY teams, they don't care about the tax costs. It makes no difference to them if they have to pay $10M or $30M.
If they make the lower tier less of a penalty then those teams are going to live in them and it will make it easier for them to build winning teams. This seems like something that is going to help the small market team, but i think it just helps the big market teams more than anything. This just sounds like a way for the big market teams to not be penalized as much.

They can keep the system the way it is but allow teams that have drafted a player and signed them to a max extension for it to not fully count against the cap. This is how it would be beneficial to most small market teams. Zion, Giannis, Jokic/Murray/MPJ, Morant, Garland/Mobley, Fox, Lillard. And it would benefit teams like Philly/Phx/Miami/Boston as well for drafting good players.
You look at the two NY and LA teams and all of their good players are FA's. Let them pay the tax. They don't care about that. Keep it a punishment though that still helps the small market teams. This would help keep big name players on their small market teams, and really do nothing to change how the big market teams operate b/c they don't care about the tax anyway. Don't bail them out. Teams like the Lakers, Clippers and before they traded everyone Brooklyn deserve all the penalties thrown at them for buying their team. A team like Golden State should not be penalized for drafting 3 hall of famers and keeping them for 10+ years. Same with Boston and Philly.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Mickey Goldmill

Baton Rouge

Member since Mar 2010

23143 posts

Posted on 2/27/23 at 11:55 am to TeddyPadillac

quote:
teams like the Golden State, the two LA and NY teams, they don't care about the tax costs. It makes no difference to them if they have to pay $10M or $30M.
If they make the lower tier less of a penalty then those teams are going to live in them and it will make it easier for them to build winning teams. This seems like something that is going to help the small market team, but i think it just helps the big market teams more than anything. This just sounds like a way for the big market teams to not be penalized as much.

There are many more teams right up against the tax (without going over) than teams just a little bit above the tax. That goes back to my point about teams not wanting to miss out on getting that big check for not being a tax team.

For the 2022 season, there were 9 teams in the tax. The lowest, Brooklyn, was over $7M above the tax line. Denver was next at over $8M. The rest were much higher.

In comparison, there were 11 teams within $5M of the luxury tax line without going over.

A change in the tiers would help small markets a lot more than it would hurt. It would also be nice if you could dip into the luxury tax (say within $5M) and still get to collect from the luxury tax pot, minus however much you are over the line.

This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 11:57 am

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by TigerinATL

Member since Feb 2005

61594 posts

Posted on 2/27/23 at 12:00 pm to TeddyPadillac

quote:
If they make the lower tier less of a penalty then those teams are going to live in them and it will make it easier for them to build winning teams. This seems like something that is going to help the small market team, but i think it just helps the big market teams more than anything.

Lakers are $17 million over the tax line this year
Clippers are $40 million over
Warriors are $47 million over

Those teams are not going to live in the "lower tiers". Currently the 1st tier is $0-$4.99 million. Raise that first tier to say $10 million and maybe lower the rate from 1.5x to 1x and you'll have teams like the Pels and Grizzlies feeling a lot more comfortable going into it, and the big market teams will still be well above it unless it's a year where they are transitioning from out of the tax to into the tax.

This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 12:02 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Pelicans Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board