Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Is over paying players strategy or stupidity?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Raptors Republic All-Star Mediumcore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Is over paying players strategy or stupidity?

    When the New Jersey Nets gave Brook Lopez a max contract earlier this summer the thought that first came to my mind was, "what were they thinking"? Then the Lakers went out and signed both Steve Nash and Dwight Howard and basically laughed in the face of the luxury tax. That got me thinking did New Jersey do something stupid or implement a truly great stategy in over paying for Lopez? Do they see teams like the Lakers, and Knicks and say to themselves, "the only way to attract big time free agents is by over paying everyone"? If free agents now look at New Jersey as a destination where they will get paid over their value wouldn't New Jersey begin to reap the same luxury the Lakers' and Knicks' have enjoyed for years now and have their choice of free agents each summer? They may not land the mega stars right away, but as their team gets better by signing second tier stars, the first tier stars will eventually see them as more attractive destination.

    My apologies if this thread is more of a basketball thread than one specifically about the Raptors which I suppose it should be considering the forum.

  2. #2
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    is overpaying strategy or stupidity? Answer: both

  3. #3
    Raptors Republic All-Star Mediumcore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craiger wrote: View Post
    is overpaying strategy or stupidity? Answer: both
    LOL, so true.

  4. #4
    Raptors Republic Starter hotfuzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    213
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I wonder if a hard salary cap would work. But then again, MLB has no salary cap and we've seen about 9 different winners in the past 13 years.

    Wasn't the recent agreement supposed to help out small-market teams?
    "Duh! Winning"
    - Charlie Sheen

  5. #5
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote hotfuzz wrote: View Post
    I wonder if a hard salary cap would work. But then again, MLB has no salary cap and we've seen about 9 different winners in the past 13 years.

    Wasn't the recent agreement supposed to help out small-market teams?
    Its important to note the significant difference between sports. Namely how the NBA is so one or two player driven, while in baseball having the best single player on the planet won't guarantee anything.

    Even with a hard cap whatever team had Lebron James, Durant, Dwight etc. would still be the contending teams year in and year out, only replaced by the next age superstars in the future.

  6. #6
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,391
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote hotfuzz wrote: View Post
    I wonder if a hard salary cap would work. But then again, MLB has no salary cap and we've seen about 9 different winners in the past 13 years.

    Wasn't the recent agreement supposed to help out small-market teams?
    The recent agreement also introduced a new revenue sharing system which is not going to start until this winter, I believe. The lakers, for example, are paying something like $43 or $49M tax bill in February/March based on last season's payroll.

    I do think the new agreement is going to do more to 'even' the playing field but it will never make things equal.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator thead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    2,996
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    The recent agreement also introduced a new revenue sharing system which is not going to start until this winter, I believe. The lakers, for example, are paying something like $43 or $49M tax bill in February/March based on last season's payroll.

    I do think the new agreement is going to do more to 'even' the playing field but it will never make things equal.
    I hope so...my young nephew is into basketball and his favorite team is the Lakers. He was saying the Raptors suck. I showed him that at the Lakers bought and paid for every win they got by paying 40 million more a year for them. If every team was hardcapped at say..75 million that would make things interesting.

  8. #8
    Raptors Republic Superstar Puffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,654
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    The recent agreement also introduced a new revenue sharing system which is not going to start until this winter, I believe....
    So, the shared revenue would allow you to overpay, and you could pay off the Luxury tax with money you recieved as part of the revenue sharing?

  9. #9
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,391
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Puffer wrote: View Post
    So, the shared revenue would allow you to overpay, and you could pay off the Luxury tax with money you recieved as part of the revenue sharing?
    I can't remember all the particulars of it.... sorry.

    My comment was more directed at hotfuzz's comment about smaller market teams in the new CBA.

  10. #10
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    937
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Puffer wrote: View Post
    So, the shared revenue would allow you to overpay, and you could pay off the Luxury tax with money you recieved as part of the revenue sharing?
    My understanding is that is technically possible, but extremely unlikely. For starters, your revenue needs to be less than (roughly) league-average in order to receive any a net positive in revenue-sharing. As well, you need to be in a market with fewer than 2.5 million TV households to receive anything. And whatever you receive in revenue sharing cannot put your bottom line over $10 million in profit.
    So if you were a small-market team, you could intentionally plan to spend yourself into a tax position, lose money as an organization, and make up the difference with revenue sharing. But this is a very dangerous game: if you lock yourself into big long-term contracts on the assumption that revenue sharing will bail you out, and then for some reason you become ineligible for revenue sharing (and there are a lot of disqualifiers), then you've made yourself into a perpetual money-loser, not to mention that you'll have little flexibility to get out of the situation.

  11. #11
    Raptors Republic Superstar Puffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,654
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote octothorp wrote: View Post
    ...But this is a very dangerous game: if you lock yourself into big long-term contracts on the assumption that revenue sharing will bail you out, and then for some reason you become ineligible for revenue sharing (and there are a lot of disqualifiers), then you've made yourself into a perpetual money-loser, not to mention that you'll have little flexibility to get out of the situation.
    Damn!

  12. #12
    Super Moderator thead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    2,996
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    for the majority of teams I think you will see less and less paying for potential. Under the current CBA, MOST teams will not take risks.

  13. #13
    Raptors Republic Superstar enlightenment's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,084
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote thead wrote: View Post
    for the majority of teams I think you will see less and less paying for potential. Under the current CBA, MOST teams will not take risks.
    Which will make teams that WILL overpay THAT much more attractive for free agents (Lakers)

  14. #14
    Raptors Republic All-Star Mediumcore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote enlightenment wrote: View Post
    Which will make teams that WILL overpay THAT much more attractive for free agents (Lakers)
    Unless apparently if you're the Raptors. Hedo, Amir, Fields all have been given contracts which most would consider over their value. But you're spot on because both New Jersey and L.A. by grossly exceeding the luxury tax have made it public that they are not bound to one max contract player.

  15. #15
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ancaster, Ont (Via Serbia)
    Posts
    292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote enlightenment wrote: View Post
    Which will make teams that WILL overpay THAT much more attractive for free agents (Lakers)
    Not really -way over the cap.
    With regards to "overspending" by Lakers, Knicks, Nets -That is only a handfull of teams because of their ridiculous cable deal. Most of the other owners (even of the competative teams -Eg Bulls, Mavs) are much more prudent.

  16. #16
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    937
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Once all the new provisions kick in, I think we'll see a climate where it becomes much more difficult for teams to live above the cap year after year. As such, we'll see 'destination' teams blowing it up and rebuilding, rather than trying to retool a roster on the fly. I think LA is leaving themselves that out, and I think Dallas is eyeing a similar plan. And that's essentially what Brooklyn did over the last couple years. But it's also a strategy where if you blow it up and put it back together wrong, you may be stuck for years. With only the $3 million MLE to work with, no sign-and-trades, and the threat of other teams poaching your young RFAs with offer sheets, managing a roster above the apron gets very complicated. Not to mention expensive: once the repeater rate kicks in, a team with an $85 million payroll is going to be paying $65 million in taxes. Which is another reason why it makes sense to blow it up, get down under the tax threshold for a couple years, and reset your repeater rate.

  17. #17
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Mediumcore wrote: View Post
    When the New Jersey Nets gave Brook Lopez a max contract earlier this summer the thought that first came to my mind was, "what were they thinking"?
    I was surprised at the Nets giving the max to Brook Lopez and a 2 year, 24 millions contract to Kris Hunphries. That;s a lot if money tied up to two very bad PnR defenders and bad defenders in general.

    It will be interesting to see how the Nets defensive scheme change throughout the season. They do have two big wings - Gerald Wallace and Joe Johnson - who can defend and are considered smart players. I am not sure anyone can cover for two slow footed big men who are also hesitant at rotating.

  18. #18
    Raptors Republic Starter torch19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    713
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I don't think the Nets' owner is concerned about paying taxes.

    Owner to GM: "Here's money. Get me wins. Or you die"
    “I don’t create controversies. They’re there long before I open my mouth. I just bring them to your attention.”

    -- Charles Barkley

  19. #19
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ancaster, Ont (Via Serbia)
    Posts
    292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote torch19 wrote: View Post
    I don't think the Nets' owner is concerned about paying taxes.

    Owner to GM: "Here's money. Get me wins. Or you die"
    1. Not for a year or 2. Then who knows. Novelty, new toy no results???
    2. Prokorov does not strike me as a most patient nor understanding owner. You also have a "strong willed" coach who likes D.
    It could get interesting & ugly.
    Another factor: Nets won 33% of their games last year. Add JJ (with an hugely overpriced contract), Generous long term deals for Lopez, Hump & Wallace, loss of some already thin bench. What do you get? 45 win team??
    MJ in his prime might be able to push 22 win team to 45 wins. But JJ?

  20. #20
    Raptors Republic Veteran Nilanka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    It's possible that Brooklyn is simply banking on Lopez (who's finally healthy again) returning to his 2nd year form, which was basically 19 pts, 9 rebounds and 2 blocks per game. He may not be Dwight Howard dominant, but those are some pretty solid numbers.
    "I don't lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation." - Fox Mulder

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •