NBA Proposes Unique ‘Franchise Tag’ to Union
"The NBA proposed to the players’ union last month a version of the "franchise tag" that it wants to include in the next collective bargaining agreement, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The tag, however, would be very different from the NFL’s version, which allows a team to essentially block one of its free agents from entering the market by binding him to his incumbent team with a one-year contract that carries a high salary based on various parameters.
The system the league has presented would not work this way, according to sources. Instead, a team would be allowed to designate one player for preferential contractual treatment, including more overall money, more guaranteed money and at least one extra year on his contract. A player would have to agree to such a designation. It is designed to work as an incentive to get a player to remain with his team rather than as a roadblock to free agency, the sources said." - Zach Lowe, Sports Illustrated
about 1 year ago
sroufe
58 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Looks like the league doesn't like players teaming up
And really, it would be best for the league if they didn’t. Back in the 80s and 90s when there were intense rivialries rivalries was the best time in the NBA. Today, everybody seems to meet up in one city to win a championship, leaving teams like Cleveland and Toronto out to dry.
Phil Jackson, after treatment for a kidney stone "When the anesthesiologist leaned over me, he said "We named your kidney stone Kobe because it's not passing."
Who is everybody?
Only Chris Bosh and LeBron James did that.
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Melo forced the issue prematurely via trade...
But with talks of Paul and Dwight amongst others, it’s going to go from a simmer to a boil over the next few years projecting this thing forward.
And you could possibly add Deron Williams to that list
I know he wasnt public with it, but no way Utah trades him for what they did if he is wanting to stay
Can't wait for October
by KingsFanInPortland on May 11, 2011 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Celtics big three comes to mind, then Miami, and now it looks like more to follow...
I really don’t blame the players though. Many of the teams seems incapable of winning, but I think they are frustrated with the right issues for the wrong reasons. If they do profit sharing then you can’t have a team like the Fakers paying twice as much in salary then other teams.
I didn't major in Common F-cking Sense, but ...
Really?
Where did he demand a trade to the Celtics? I kind of missed that.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 12, 2011 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Really?
Where did he demand a trade to the Lakers? I kind of missed that.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 12, 2011 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions
I am shocked people are using Gasol and Ray Allen as actual arguements
when the more obvious one would be Vince Carter. Oh yeah I forgot, people don’t care because it didn’t have an impact on anything. All they really care about is the outcome of someone getting traded to a good team, not how it all happened. That is unless it’s Mike Bibby, then we really don’t care because we like that outcome.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 12, 2011 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions
I was being snarky
I had no idea why he typed Pau Gasol, So I just threw up a random name there.
My bad.
Interesting
I wonder if they will create some sort of “soft cap” specifically for this NBA version of a franchise tag.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
For instance -
It may be a soft cap to sign your own free agent, but a hard cap if you plan on signing someone else’s free agent.
"I think this can be a good line-up for us and we’ll see how it works." - PW on replacing Casspi and Beno with JT and Head in the starting lineup (Nov. 18, 2010 Sac Bee)
Isn't that what the NBA has now?
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
Yup
I personally was wondering if there would be a soft cap just for the franchise tag athlete and perhaps a harder cap for even one’s own free agents.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I think that's what I meant to confirm with you
But it ended up coming out as soft cap for everyone on your own team.
"I think this can be a good line-up for us and we’ll see how it works." - PW on replacing Casspi and Beno with JT and Head in the starting lineup (Nov. 18, 2010 Sac Bee)
Yes nerd.
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Brainfart - I really don't know why I said that
I think I meant what Wally said in his reply above. But who really knows.
"I think this can be a good line-up for us and we’ll see how it works." - PW on replacing Casspi and Beno with JT and Head in the starting lineup (Nov. 18, 2010 Sac Bee)
I like this concept
Teams would have an advantage in retaining their star players in free agency, and this might not compel teams to trade away a free agent to-be ala Denver did with Carmelo. I’ll be interested to see how the details of this play out, though. For instance, would this allow a team to sign its franchise player to an excessive contract and trade him as part of an ultra sign-and trade?
Don't the also need to find a way to deal with the sign-and-trade loophole that players have been using to go wherever they want?
To me, you can give any “contract incentives” that you want for a player to stay with his current team (like they already do), but as long as those players can still cash-in those incentives by forcing their team to agree to a sign-and-trade (“I’m signing with _ anyways, so you might as well get something in return”), it won’t ever really have any teeth to it. It would be an easy thing for the league to do, other than actually getting the Players Union to agree to it.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 12:14 PM PDT reply actions
You'd think an easy way to do that
is to make a rule stating that a player can’t be trade for a certain period of time right after signing a contract.
Author of the Pick and Scroll and NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
Exactly, it would just be a matter of getting the Players Union to go along with it.
That’s the not-easy part.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I get the sense that the main concern here is curbing salary
not limiting players from being able to go elsewhere
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Closing the sign-and-trade loophole would help to curb salary
assuming some big players still chose to sign elsewhere (for lower salary).
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions
It would also keep the Kings from trading Jon Brockman for Darnell Jackson and a 2nd round pick.
James & Bosh would have signed in Miami with or without those S&T’s.
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
But it would have cost them a great deal more money to do so (I thought Bosh went without a S&T, though).
My point is, if you make it to where players can’t cash-in on their max contract with their current team but still go where they want by forcing a trade, then you’re still giving players the freedom to play where they want but you’re making it very lucrative for them to stay put (and you don’t have to deal with all of the Franchise Tag business). They should just do away with the S&T nonsense and probably bolster the contract incentives to stay with your team. Let LeBron take his talents to South Beach if he wants, but have it cost him $50 million to do so.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Toronto and Cleveland did those S&T's as much to get some kind of value..
….as opposed to nothing. That’s my opinion anyway. (Toronto especially.)
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I know that, but the point is that the Players still have the power to push those teams into that.
LeBron told the world he was signing with Miami, and then he told the Cavs he’d be happy to get them something in return with a S&T by giving him his payday. What if that wasn’t an option? Maybe LeBron still signs with Miami and the Cavs get nothing, but maybe LeBron actually re-signs with Cleveland if it was actually going to cost him a huge chunk of change to leave.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
he was leaving either way
they called the Cavs bluff after the Decision. If Cavs said no Lebron wouldn’t have just changed his mind after all of that.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm presenting a hypothetical re-writing of history
If the S&T had not been an option, and the incentives to re-sign with Cleveland were greater, LeBron may very well have still bolted for Miami and left the Cavs empty-handed (as opposed to the plentiful bounty that they corralled in the S&T), but he also may have decided that it was just too much money to leave on the table (in hypothetical world, where the “money left on the table” would have been much greater). I’m just saying that I don’t think they necessarily need to take the choice completely away from the players, but they could make the choice to leave a much more difficult one.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Wut?
The incentives to re-sign with Cleveland were greater. Lebron made his decision before communicating with Cleveland. He nor Miami had zero reason to believe the Cavs would be willing to do a sign and trade, in fact everyone was shocked they were willing to do so. Lebron was going if that choice wasn’t on the table, it was all about what Cleveland wanted to do.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with Wally.
The incentive to make more money in Cleveland was greater. Plus, LeBron did not sign for the max even in that S&T. He took a bit less than the max (not that it really matters since 9 million bucks is not a huge difference when you’re talking about LeBronze, but still….) and I think that was the most he could get without pushing Miami over the edge. It seemed clear that Wade, Bosh (who wanted the most out of the contract since he gets a lot less endorsements than Wade or James) and James wanted to play together.
Bosh was willing to take that 5 year deal, and wanted to get that extra year and money. I don’t think it ever mattered to LeBron. LeBron was set for life before the contract and after the contract. His financial situation did not change by moving to Miami one way or the other.
I think what the owners are trying to take away is players power to determine the league. Which is forgetting the obvious, but whatever. Owners do stupid things for no reason sometimes.
No matter what method you come up with, you will always have reasons teams don’t want to trade for players or reasons that players want to live in one market or another. That will always be the case.
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Greater than they are now.
I know the incentives to stay were there. I’m saying, had the incentives been even greater (and a S&T not been allowed for him to cash-in on the incentives regardless), maybe he would have had more to think about.
Take the idea of the current system, but put it on steroids and actually make it effective.
"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie
by AnotherStupidSN on May 11, 2011 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
There was no incentive that was keeping LeBron in Cleveland.
He wanted out so badly and cared about nothing else. Isn’t that obvious?
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Well not only that but more money in Cleveland
and that whole sign and trade was AFTER his announcement. There was zero guarantee he would have gotten it.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 12, 2011 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This goes into my guaranteed money idea
For instance only 2 players on a roster can get guaranteed money. Bosh in this instance could still sign a deal with Miami for $105 million but unlike Lebron and Wade his money would not be guaranteed from the Heat. Maybe that forces him to look at another team or Toronto again.
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
Just curious
Does any body know what constitutes the players 57%? Does in come right off the gross?
If a team pays luxury tax is that a team expense or part of the players expense?
I think that designated player salary would be perfect if it was not allowed in sign and trade but it would still restrict a player leaving. Say Melo wanted to go to NY and Denver said no…they would still lose him but the loss in salary to Melo would be greater than it is now.
My C is fuked up. Please feel free to add a c wherever you deem appropriate. Thanks.
If I am reading this right ...
I don’t see what is in this proposal for the owners. Essentially its a one year bonanza clause for the player if they choose to agree with it … nice for them.
The problem is owners still want a mechanism for keeping their star player on the team and this doesn’t seem to do it all. It says right there players have to agree to the franchise tag … well they can agree to an extension now or leave. All this clause does is guarantee players more money.
The problem with the NFL franchise tag is the NFL has learned to use it on non-franchise players. They pay the actual actual franchise player whatever he wants to keep him than use the franchise tag mostly on players they want to keep or evaluate for another year (in most cases these days).
I’m all for a franchise tag but it has to be constructed so its only used on franchise players, no one year monkey business for the owners. My version of a franchise tag, if it’s placed on player he stuck on that team but he’s a guaranteed at least three year deal making star player money, like $15 million per year or above. A price an owner would only pay for an actual ticket selling franchise player.
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
I think the way aroud that is you can only use the franchise tag on one player
and it has to a minimum of a 3 year commitment. You can re-designate that tag in 3 years, but once it’s used, you have to wait 3 years to re-use/re-evaluate it.
Since basketball has so many fewer players/positions, it shouldn’t be something that’s allowed every year.
Yep the franchise tag used every year bothers me. However some teams do have multiple franchise players. The NFL doesn’t have this problem because owners were smart enough to spend big money only on their good players and give everyone else on their team a near minimum. Basketball owners can’t seem to take a queue otherwise they might have saved themselves a lot money.
I’m sure this would never be agreed upon but I’d give each team 2 franchise tags with a three year re-use period like your plan. Yet only those franchise players get guaranteed money. The non franchise players can have their contract terminated if they are cut, I think it might drive down some of these middle class salaries hurting the league. Also always teams to restructure quicker.
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
I like the NFL version better
Teams should be able to keep their cornerstone in place to build around.
Taking Cleveland for example. They built that whole roster around LeBron. With him gone, they’re stuck with bogus contract and meddling talent with years of recovery. I think teams should be able to ‘protect’ their vision by designating that focal player to at least a 3 year tag, but in return, that contract isn’t counted towards the teams overall cap and these players will get ridiculously more amounts of money because of that designation.
Yeah I mean even if that player HATES his situation
he’s going to get that BIG PAYDAY. I also think to simplify the process, that franchise players can’t be traded away until their franchise tag label is removed after 3 years.
Or maybe the franchise label gets renewed each year
but if a team places the tag from one player to another, the original franchise tagged player can then choose to opt of their contract to re-nogotiate the terms of their deal with the same team or hit free agency.
Just thinking out loud here
I really don’t feel bad for the players at all in the negotiations. They’re more than taken care of. I want what’s best for the entire NBA to make the league stronger, more profitable and enhance the quality of play amongst all 30 teams(getting rid of the Lakers dominance due to their market size/capital).
Aren't the players also out for what you are talking about?
They want profit sharing and that would seem to be the only way towards equitable talent across rosters.
I didn't major in Common F-cking Sense, but ...
Cleveland had Lebron for seven years
asking for the NFL equivalent is essentially saying star NBA players get zero say in where they want to play nomatter what.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
The NFL works that way
Teams still stuck the franchise tag on Brady and Manning and they have been on their team a decade.
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
well first I should point out I think it's kind of BS that they do that with the NFL
that being said though, don’t you think the NFL and NBA are kind of different. Especially given things like number of players on a team, injuries, and speciality?
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 11, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think it's BS
The franchise concept protects apart of the fans interest in the sport. If the star players keep pissing all over their original cities it hurts fan perception and in the long run going to hurt revenue.
One aspect about the NFL franchise tag is there are escalators. It costs more to franchise a player a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc time around. Lets take Lebron for instance. He’s spent 7 season in Cleveland and say the franchise tag has been used on him once. If Cleveland franchises him again they have to pay him 20-30% more than his previous contract he’s already the highest paid player. Yes poor Lebron he doesn’t get to go South Beach but he is getting paid substantially more than any player in the league as a trade off. Maybe franchising the most expensive player in the NBA again is too cost prohibitive Cleveland, if that is the case they don’t franchise him but still can try to outbid everyone in the free agent market. So essentially Cleveland can franchise him until they can no longer afford to make him the highest player in the NBA, again not a bad trade off for the player. Lebron’s other option is to piss and moan until he ruins his reputation in Cleveland, ala the Carmelo method.
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
I like the idea from a player incentive standpoint but not as a basketball is a team sport aspect
Highlighing one player makes the negotiating process the spark to cause an envy/jealousy fire.
envy/jealousy is already a big issue
no system is going to fix that issue
sd377 wants to ban me for unleashing the Kaepernick Supernova Gamma Ray
I'm not sure what is hugely different here
Can’t teams already sign their main guy for more money and an extra year?
I think they should have a real franchise tag.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
your question here is exactly why I was a little curious myself
the only way I could see it being different as described above is if they put in a harder cap where only these “franchise tag” players contracts are exempt from the cap.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 12, 2011 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I just wonder if this will compel very good players
who aren’t franchise players on their own team (any team with Dwight Howard, LeBron etc.) to move to ‘lesser’ teams where they will get the franchise.
Also, isn’t it possible to attach a franchise tag to a different player every year (when their deal comes up for renewal?) E.g: Tyreke for 2013, DMC for 2014.
This.
Would imagine there'd be a player limit
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by wallywagon11 on May 13, 2011 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
