Spending Leads To Winning
Old 05-26-2010, 09:13 PM   #1 (permalink)
is getting to the line..

Senior Member
 
Ex2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,300
Representing:
Post Spending Leads To Winning

The first paragraph pretty much sums it up... someone fwd to MLSE

Quote:
Eight of the top-10 teams in terms of total salary qualified for the playoffs during the 09-10 season, with only the Knicks (8th) and Wizards (10th) missing out on postseason basketball.

The Blazers and Thunder were respectively ranked 29th and 30th in 09-10 salary and both made the playoffs, but the teams ranked between 19th and 28th were all lottery participants. Considering there are merely 14 NBA teams that do not qualify for the playoffs, the presence of this glut of lower payroll teams playing shorter seasons does suggest spending money is a substantial factor in on-court success or failure in today's NBA.

However, I don't believe it is necessarily an indictment on the size of market and their ability to compete in all instances, particularly given the presence of the Warriors, Clippers, Pistons, Rockets and Sixers. The Bay Area, Los Angeles, Detroit, Houston and Philadelphia are amongst the biggest markets in the country. Some of that frugality from this group of franchises is a result of how ownership makes its finance choices and also because of past or future intentions of achieving salary cap flexibility. Cleveland and San Antonio are each smaller NBA markets and they had supremely expensive payrolls.

The average payroll rank for NBA playoff teams was 11.4 in 09-10.

Half as many teams make the MLB playoffs as the NBA, with only eight qualifiers. In 2009, seven of the top-13 teams in salary made the playoffs, with the eighth team being the 16th ranked Colorado Rockies.

The New York Yankees won the 2009 World Series with a payroll that exceeded $200M and was more than $50M more than its closest fiscal rival.

Winning is even more closely tied to payroll in today's MLB, though we do see far more teams like the 2008 Rays and 2003 Marlins succeed in the postseason due to the somewhat random nature of baseball.

The average payroll rank for MLB playoff teams was 8.4 in 2009.

The NFL had the most evenly distributed representation of playoff teams during its most recent season. Out of the top-five teams in salary, only the Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints even reached the playoffs. In total, five teams in the top-10 in total salary reached the playoffs. The 14th ranked Baltimore Ravens, 19th ranked Philadelphia Eagles, 21st ranked Indianapolis Colts, 22nd ranked Minnesota Vikings, 23rd ranked New England Patriots, 26th ranked Cincinnati Bengals and 28th ranked Dallas Cowboys also reached the playoffs.

The average payroll rank for NFL playoff teams was 15.8 in 2009.

The salary cap era is intended to be a mechanism that evens all franchises, but the dollar-for-dollar luxury tax makes spending more money easy enough for the richer clubs and prohibitive enough for the smaller budgeted clubs to be scared away.

''I think the Spurs were the last time we will see a non-luxury tax champ for a while,'' said Mark Cuban to the New York Times in 2003, a comment triggered by Gary Payton's decision to sign with the Lakers. ''In a law of unintended consequences way, the tax is a threshold that proves to players the team is willing to lose money to win. If a team is willing to pay two times to improve, then the player may be willing to lose a little as well since they are on the same side of the profit and loss statement.''

In the 2006-07 season, there were five teams that had a luxury tax bill, including the Spurs, who owed just $196k after winning the Finals. Two of the other teams to pay the tax that year (Knicks, Wolves) did not qualify for the playoffs.

This season, there will be twelve teams that pay the luxury tax, meaning an increase of greater than 100% over just four seasons.

The NBA's final four teams were ranked first (Lakers), fourth (Celtics), fifth (Magic) and eighth (Suns).

Joining those four in the final eight were the Cavaliers (third), Spurs (sixth), Jazz (twelfth) and Hawks (eighteenth).

A hard salary cap would likely create an NBA with greater parity, similar to what we see with the NFL, but it is less advantageous for the overall health of the NBA. Teams that can afford an expensive team tend to be in markets where winning tends to lead to financial gain, whereas many smaller market teams have difficulty making money regardless of whether or not they win and are reliant on the trickle down economic revenue from the luxury tax.

By: Christopher Reina
RealGM.com Writer
RealGM: From The Rafters - Spending Leads To Winning

Last edited by Ex2k; 05-26-2010 at 09:21 PM.
Ex2k is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 12:11 AM   #2 (permalink)
ballinnnnnn

Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 308
Representing:
Default

Hard cap in the NBA would be tough to enforce! In the NHL you have more players, but half of the team is at minimum or just above that. In the NBA, the going rate for a backup player seems to be 3m, which, in a hard cap scenario, would be 1/20 of your teams cap. That's a lot considering in order to win you'd need a superstar and a few stars taking up at least 3/5 of your cap.

My plan:

Lower Luxury tax to about 65M. Enforce a HARD CAP at 85million, with soft cap remaining at 56. Every year, the hard cap reduces by 1.5-3 million depending on revenues (good=1.5, bad=3). In 10 years we're looking at a hard cap of like 65 million, where the luxury tax would be (due to an average soft cap rise of 1 million a year, it seems).

Just a basic plan I thought of just now. Criticize me all you want, I love feedback!
jakapono24 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 12:49 AM   #3 (permalink)
Lao Wai
is pounding the rock! (Edit)

Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakapono24 View Post
Hard cap in the NBA would be tough to enforce! In the NHL you have more players, but half of the team is at minimum or just above that. In the NBA, the going rate for a backup player seems to be 3m, which, in a hard cap scenario, would be 1/20 of your teams cap. That's a lot considering in order to win you'd need a superstar and a few stars taking up at least 3/5 of your cap.

My plan:

Lower Luxury tax to about 65M. Enforce a HARD CAP at 85million, with soft cap remaining at 56. Every year, the hard cap reduces by 1.5-3 million depending on revenues (good=1.5, bad=3). In 10 years we're looking at a hard cap of like 65 million, where the luxury tax would be (due to an average soft cap rise of 1 million a year, it seems).

Just a basic plan I thought of just now. Criticize me all you want, I love feedback!
Actually a very decent proposal it could work.
Also setting a hard cap at the 46 million.
With one Bird type player to be added with a maximum salary of 30 million for a maximum of 4 years.
No contract should exceed 4 years with 4th year being club option.
I think the draft salary figures for players are fine

This would limit max money being 76 million. The maximum players would be reduced to 12. With only exception a extreme amount of injuries,

That would give 11 players 4.2 million average per year.
  Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 12:53 AM   #4 (permalink)
is pounding

Senior Member
 
VanCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,073
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lao Wai View Post
Actually a very decent proposal it could work.
Also setting a hard cap at the 46 million.
With one Bird type player to be added with a maximum salary of 30 million for a maximum of 4 years.
No contract should exceed 4 years with 4th year being club option.
I think the draft salary figures for players are fine

This would limit max money being 76 million. The maximum players would be reduced to 12. With only exception a extreme amount of injuries,

That would give 11 players 4.2 million average per year.
good luck selling that to the players...
VanCity is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 06:15 AM   #5 (permalink)
Lao Wai
is pounding the rock! (Edit)

Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A00715890 View Post
good luck selling that to the players...
Really not a huge change even with the Lakers 92 million take away Kobes 23 million the average for the other 14 Lakers is 4.92

Yes the rest is a harder sell.
  Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 08:54 AM   #6 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Senior Member
 
Superjudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 17,371
Representing:
Default

Make it the exact same as the NHL. Let the Players adjust.

NHL Salaries came down, the players still came to camp ready to go when it was time to play.

Whether you're getting 4.5 million or 3.75 million, only a fool would say no.
Its basic economic reality.
Superjudge is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 10:26 AM   #7 (permalink)
ballinnnnnn

Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 308
Representing:
Default

It's true, but the question is, what are we to do when LeBron and Wade, etc. sign these huge contracts? I mean you could say that max salary is now 10 million per year, but there will be SO many players making more than that already. It would be really hard to make such a sudden transition. That's why my plan is an ease into lowering overall salaries. In 10 years, the average Salary goes down far more.


And with the NHL you are talking about paying like 25 guys, in the NBA it's 12.
jakapono24 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 10:50 AM   #8 (permalink)
is the baby faced assassin

Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YO MAMMA
Posts: 81,104
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superjudge View Post
Make it the exact same as the NHL. Let the Players adjust.

NHL Salaries came down, the players still came to camp ready to go when it was time to play.

Whether you're getting 4.5 million or 3.75 million, only a fool would say no.
Its basic economic reality.
Can't really compare the two. Soft cap vs Hard cap and the NHL has a smaller amount to spend on twice the amount of players. NBA players will always make more then NHL players mainly based on roster size alone.
jeffb is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 12:00 PM   #9 (permalink)
the next dictator of MLSE

fresh and clean
 
Windex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: uʍop ɹǝpun
Posts: 22,591
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffb View Post
Can't really compare the two. Soft cap vs Hard cap and the NHL has a smaller amount to spend on twice the amount of players. NBA players will always make more then NHL players mainly based on roster size alone.
NHL and NBA have similar caps, $57 mil in hockey, basically the same in bball
the extra $10+ mil in luxury is the difference
Windex is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 12:20 PM   #10 (permalink)
is the baby faced assassin

Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YO MAMMA
Posts: 81,104
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Windex View Post
NHL and NBA have similar caps, $57 mil in hockey, basically the same in bball
the extra $10+ mil in luxury is the difference
Exactly, soft cap (NBA), Hard cap (NHL), add to that the NBA roster is about half that of and NHL roster. Therefor the NBA will always have higher paid athletes over the NHL.
jeffb is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 07:49 PM   #11 (permalink)
Falling asleep

Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 490
Representing:
Default

Gotta pay to win championships..its written in stone
Raptors_fan202 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24