|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Oct 30, 2014 10:33:14 GMT -5
Is the new nba tv deal going to impact our 63 million dollar salary cap?
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Oct 30, 2014 18:12:15 GMT -5
Thats a good question. If it did, it wouldnt be by much.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Oct 31, 2014 8:34:57 GMT -5
Average players will start getting 10+ mil with stars landing deals at 20 mil a year. I would suggest a gradual increase in 1 million increments.
|
|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Oct 31, 2014 13:30:03 GMT -5
Ya, I was thinking about this too. Because realistically the MAX deals we're use to now are going to go through the roof.
|
|
|
Post by petey (Huskies) on Oct 31, 2014 15:12:11 GMT -5
I think it needs to be more than a gradual increase of 1mill per. The new NBA TV deal completely changes the landscape in terms of profit sharing.
I think getting to around 72-74 million, within 3 years, is the ideal scenario.
Example;
14/15 - 63 mill 15/16 - 66 mill 16/17 - 69 mill 17-18 - 72 mill
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 3, 2014 7:15:01 GMT -5
I'd be fine with tying our soft cap to the NBA's, relative to teams size of course; which would give us a big jump in soft cap. But, in all fairness I think it would mean us doing the same with the lux tax, in our case hard cap, which would give us a big drop in hard cap.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 3, 2014 10:36:18 GMT -5
See that is near impossible for some of us because of contracts we're already committed to for years to come. Plus, we don't have 30 teams to eat up the bigger contracts.
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 4, 2014 6:29:24 GMT -5
Couldnt that same argument be used for not raising the soft cap?
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 4, 2014 7:00:35 GMT -5
I don't stand to benefit at all by supporting raising the soft cap. If anything it hurts my team because teams would have more cap space to sign players. So no, the same argument doesn't apply to the soft cap. This change helps the tanking teams.
|
|
|
Post by jazzfan1971 (Angels) on Nov 5, 2014 14:56:28 GMT -5
Aren't our caps all ready set up to move with league salaries?
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 5, 2014 16:05:56 GMT -5
Hard cap, not soft cap
|
|
|
Post by jazzfan1971 (Angels) on Nov 5, 2014 16:25:03 GMT -5
That's too bad, would be easier if both were tied to league salaries.
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 6, 2014 6:30:29 GMT -5
Hard cap is tied to salaries, but not the nba lux cap. Which would put alot of vbaa teams over it.
Soft cap is sort of relative IMO, it really only has a major factor in free agency. Then it doesnt really matter what their NBA salaries are. If we tied it to the nbas soft cap, there would probably be too much $$ IMO
|
|
|
Post by A-Ron (The Red Barons) on Nov 6, 2014 19:27:18 GMT -5
Well it effects the players we protect as well. If I tried to protect the top salaries on my team I would only get to protect 4 guys which is also a function of the NBA salary cap going up because guys are getting inflated contracts in anticipation of them being able to fit more under the cap.
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 8, 2014 7:05:30 GMT -5
Again, Im perfectly fine tying the cap to the NBA, but the lux tax should also play
|
|