Your CBA/Salary Cap ideas/tweaks/etc.

[Fan from VT]

So, how about a general thread for Salary Cap ideas, tweaks, etc. Can be big or small!

For example:

It bugs me that the salary cap changing less than expected made it harder to add hayward this year.

What I would like to see is:
1. Honest, open-book accounting of Basketball Related Income (so all players and owners know what is driving the salary cap determination and the players' share).
2. Assume we keep the basic "A Max Contract is X% of the cap"
3. Decrease the % raises individually, since I want to tie salaries to a % of cap, which increases on average.
4. I would then like to see contracts all signed in "% of cap" language. So, rather than, say, the cap is 100,000,000, and you then sign a 25% max for 25,000,000 per year with 8% raises in actual dollars, you would sign for 25% of the cap in year 1, 25%+4% of 25% in year 2 (26%), 26% of cap +4% of 26% in year 3 (27.04%).

So this would look like this:

Under the current plan, if the cap is 100,000,000, you would sign for:

25,000,000 year 1 with 8% raises.
27,000,000 year 2
29,160,000 year 3.

But, let’s say the new plan, you’d actually sign for:
25% year 1
26% year 2
27.04% year 3
28.0816% year 4


So if the cap stayed the same each year at 100,000,000, you’d get this salary:.

25,000,000 year 1  old way vs 25,000,000 new way
27,000,000 year 2 old way vs 26,000,000 new way
29,160,000 year 3 old way vs 27,040,000 new way

But if the cap goes up, your salary goes up; cap goes down, your salary goes down.

Cap 100,000,000 year 1: 25,000,000 old way vs 25,000,000 new way
Cap 104,000,000 year 2: 27,000,000 old way vs 27,040,000 new way
Bad year, cap 98,000,000 year 3: 28,576,800 old way vs 26,499,200 new way
Great year, cap 114,000,000 year 4: 31,492,800 old way vs 32,013,024 new way


Now, there would be some additional fine tuning of the exact new % raise to keep it even (this is not a plan to screw anyone over, just an accounting adjustment). But the point is, on average, the payments end up the same, but if a team plans to have 30% of capspace, they will, regardless of if the cap stays the same, drops slightly, or even jumps by 20% (in which case the players on the roster would also see a big actual dollar raise).

[droopdog7]

Was listening to a recent segment (not sure where) that discussed tying salary with performance.  Did not hear the entire thing but it was hilarious in parts.  Among the comments were, "there will be no more resting of stars). 

Will never happen of course.

[Fan from VT]

Was listening to a recent segment (not sure where) that discussed tying salary with performance.  Did not hear the entire thing but it was hilarious in parts.  Among the comments were, "there will be no more resting of stars). 

Will never happen of course.

Yeah, it always sounds enticing, but tough to do practically.

How do you determine how to properly rate them?
Who determines that?
Does their play this year determine cap hit for next year?
Could a player then not be allowed to take less to play where they want?
Would teams be restricted from "overpaying?"

[saltlover]

I would love it if teams could agree to keep part of a player's salary on the books in a trade.  Let's look at Evan Turner.  He's overpaid, but he's still a useful player.  But at $18 million per season, no one is going to touch him, except Phoenix or Brooklyn if they also get draft picks.  But suppose Portland were allowed to agree to trade him to a team that would pay him $10 million a year, while Portland kept he other $8 million annually on their books?  Portland might be able to get something useful for Turner while clearing some of his salary.  Turner wouldn't be destined to be tradable to a cellar-dwelling team.

Portland and the other team would still need to match salaries, but it would be with Turner's $10 million value, not $18 million.  It would create a much more liquid trade market, allow useful but overpaid players to be traded to good teams, and greatly limit the buyout market.