The NBA lockout ultimatum includes the threat that the hard salary cap will be put back on the table. Given how long it's been gone, that could be terrifying for players under pressure. Plus, The Hook considers whether the mini mid-level is a good thing for high-salary teams.
Nov 7, 2011 - David Stern's NBA lockout ultimatum has to be terrifying for players, but not because of the continued jousting on the revenue split issue. Stern said that if players don't take the league's deal by Wednesday, the owners' new offer will lower the proposed revenue split to 47 percent for players ... and the good ol' flex cap will be back.
Players have faced the specter of a revenue split at or below 50 percent for some time now. Though the league has moved to 50 percent several times since the start of October, the union has been well aware that this issue remains at play so long as negotiation are ongoing. Players have lived with the idea that their aggregate salary will sharply decrease in the new deal.
But the hard salary cap -- which is what the league's NHL-style flex cap actually is -- has been off of the table for months. This is something I'm certainly guilty of forgetting as negotiations roll on: dropping the flex cap for piecemeal cap system fixes was a big concession on the part of the owners. I don't personally think that the league has much ground to demand a hard-cap system for the reasons it has been pushing (namely competitive balance, which is more a flying unicorn than a reasonable goal), but both sides were clearly invested in getting their way on it. The league caved. That's worth a lot.
Bringing it back into the picture now, after months of negotiations on other items, is a real big play by the league, and it's something that players can't ignore. If Stern sticks to his word and players reject the 50-50 deal, and a year is lost through court proceedings, and NHL players end up being right, that it's no use to miss a season because you'll take the same crappy deal in the end, and that crappy deal includes a hard cap? Players will be furious with themselves and their leaders. They can take a deal without a hard cap right now. That deal may not be on the table by Thursday. That's a huge thing to consider, given how strident players were in opposing the hard cap.
The mini mid-level deal presented by owners as a compromise on the issue of limits to what teams over the luxury tax line can do seems like a fair, smart compromise. The normal mid-level exception, as negotiated in the new deal, starts at $5 million and extends for up to three years. Any team over the cap can use it once a season, split between multiple players if they'd like.
But owners didn't want teams over the tax to be allowed to boost their salary by using the mid-level any longer. The owners and union were at loggerheads over the issue, even after big ticket items like the luxury tax itself were settled. So owners proposed a mini mid-level for tax teams. Teams over the tax threshold -- which is roughly 120 percent of the salary cap -- can only use a two-year mid-level with a starting salary of $2.5 million. In theory, this would hurt tax teams' negotiating position, which would have the dual effect of sending the "best" mid-level players to teams that can offer the full mid-level, and then as a result create an incentive for teams to stay under the tax approach free agency. It would also reduce tax teams' top-level salary by $2.5 to $3 million, even if there were no impact on where free agents signed.
That's all theoryball, though. I can see a world where the mini mid-level actually helps tax teams avoid costly mistakes.
We know how dreadfully the mid-level has performed over time. Teams over the tax -- like the Lakers, Heat and Mavericks -- have an interesting advantage in competing for free agent veterans on account of competing for a championship. You don't see veteran free agents lining up to sign with the Kings, after all. Consider a player like Mike Miller, who fits a need with the Heat, has made plenty of money, but is young enough that taking the veteran's minimum isn't quite right. The Heat would love to be able to offer him the full mid-level, but geez, the Big Three have sent them into tax territory. They have the mini mid-level, though. And that's all the other major contenders have, too.
So Miller would end up taking it, I reckon. That means a lower salary level and a shorter commitment for Miami.
Now consider Al Harrington. He's choosing between the Mavericks (already over the tax) and Nuggets (not quite yet). The Mavs have the mini mid-level, the Nuggets have the full version. Dallas represents the better chance to compete by a decent margin ... but Denver can offer twice the annual salary and an extra year. If salaries were even, he'd pick Dallas. But they aren't, so he chooses Denver.
Denver can't dare offer just half of its mid-level -- then they'd lose their guy. But capping the amount tax teams can spend on their mid-level players, the league does those teams a favor ... because we're pretty certain mid-level players like Harrington and Miller are worth closer to $2.5 million than $5 million.
There will be some mid-level players who will hold out for the full version instead of the mini edition; Samuel Dalembert seems like a class of 2011 player suited to the $5-million exception, in particular. But in the aggregate, over time, I'm pretty sure the creation of a second mid-level will help tax teams by artificially constricting their ability to make mistakes. Maybe in 10 years teams that don't pay the tax will be begging for a mini mid-level of their own.
The Hook runs Monday through Friday. See the archives.
10 comments
5
Nov 28
3
Nov 27
Comments
It seems like you are leaning toward recommending taking the deal
And, though it’s kind of an awful, one-sided giveback, I think it’s time for the Union to take the deal… and then work behind the scenes to bring together investors and former players to start an alternate league with a more friendly salary structure and no ‘one and done’ requirement. The only thing that’s really going to improve the players position is a competing league.
If you could find 10 ownership groups with $50-100 million bucks of seed money, you could grant franchises to them, schedule a 70 game season, play in 10 of the 50 or so underutilized arenas in the country and offer NBA free agents $25 million dollar contracts, then have a draft including high school players and have minimum salaries about twice what the NBA offers. Given the NBA’s self imposed salary and age limitations, siphoning players will kind of be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Losing top players to an alternate league is the only thing that’s going to get the owners to relax their hardline position. An alternative way to do this is to tell the owners to fuck off and just start a collective league with these players right now.
Get The Frickin' Rebound
by fuhry on Nov 7, 2011 11:09 AM EST reply actions
Good point on the mini-mid
but of course smaller market or non contending teams are already in that boat when negotiating with those mid level type vets right now. As it is they really have no choice but to offer the full 5 years at the full amount.
Although I agree with you that some of that strategy will be employed, the mini-mid may also actually save smaller market teams money as they can offer 3 years at $3 mil a year or 3 at $4, still a significant incentive to go to the smaller market over the lenght of a deal.
But yes, teams over the tax, theoretically contenders with two or more franchise Stars in place, will be able to reload on good veteran talent every two years, as you said, saved from themselves.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Nov 7, 2011 11:22 AM EST reply actions
All I want to know is who the **** is that crazy psycho looking guy to the left that looks like he wants to kill Fisher???
No one else looked at that picture and thought the crazy sailor was just a little bit out of place? =/
by ap3604 on Nov 7, 2011 11:26 AM EST reply actions
Btw... he looks even crazier for the photo on the front page of sbnation vs the one in this article
since you see more of his face
by ap3604 on Nov 7, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
He is protecting him.
by thewiz06 on Nov 7, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
He's a NY doorman
That’s where all the ex-mafia guys went.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Nov 7, 2011 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Looks like a sailor.
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Nov 7, 2011 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah… I was wondering whether this was at the negotiation venue or a Halloween party.
Retire Bruce Bowen's #12!
by Tim C. on Nov 7, 2011 5:32 PM EST up reply actions
Players need to take the deal.
They are idiots if they don’t. Don’t ask me to justify my comment. I don’t have the time nor will to explain business unless you pay me.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
by kwill on Nov 8, 2011 12:53 AM EST reply actions
I have to say, after being fairly critical of you’re subjectivity and tone, that this quote, and the article in general reeds like an honest analysis. Compliments.
"My logic fails all the time...especially when talking to females" Rook6980
by Dutch Hoopfan on Nov 8, 2011 4:27 AM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed