2022-2023 NBA Season Thread

[Stakesarehigh]

Yeah, I just read it again.

The other owners actually want the penalties to be higher.

Only Lacob is interested in adding that caveat.

But, I'd imagine the Cavs, Memphis might be watching closely.

Of course Lacob is. But again you can't just change the rule on a dime when teams have made decisions on players that changed the course of their franchises already.

You would have to have a future date so teams can plan.

 

[fightinfunbags]

Guys like Spo Lowry Butler and Bam have to love that stuff. It seems like those guys really embrace that us against the world, get no respect narrative to help drive them.

 

[Mecca]

Oh, man...

Thoughts and prayers.

 

[fightinfunbags]

Saw somewhere that they are trying to negotiate a less punitive tax for keeping the guys you drafted.

Outside of Wiggins and Donte, that's pretty much everyone .

Nooooooo. Fuck that noise. You can’t do that now. That becomes a gift for one single team and a rewrite of the rules exclusively for that team’s benefit. I’m ok with that rule change with the language that it applies to future contracts from date of passage of the new rule. It should be excluded from existing contracts agreed upon prior to the rule change.

 

[Mecca]

Of course Lacob is. But again you can't just change the rule on a dime when teams have made decisions on players that changed the course of their franchises already.

You would have to have a future date so teams can plan.

Yeah, I think he's trying to plant the seeds for Dec 15 when they can negotiate the new CBA.

One thing he has in his favor?

Players Union should be all in because it means more money for some guys.

Imagine a scenario where the Thunder, Pistons, Cavs, Toronto, Memphis or Pelicans landed Wenbenyamma.

......and they had the ability to throw everyone a max.

Bruh.

I kinda get Lacob's point.

Why penalize us for drafting well.

The heavier penalties should go to teams like the Lakers, Clippers and Nets who traded for guys or signed them as free agents.

 

[Mecca]

Nooooooo. Fuck that noise. You can’t do that now. That becomes a gift for one single team and a rewrite of the rules exclusively for that team’s benefit. I’m ok with that rule change with the language that it applies to future contracts from date of passage of the new rule. It should be excluded from existing contracts agreed upon prior to the rule change.

It's not happening.

The other owners are not onboard.

They actually want the tax to become more punitive.

 

[trojanfan12]

Of course Lacob is. But again you can't just change the rule on a dime when teams have made decisions on players that changed the course of their franchises already.

You would have to have a future date so teams can plan.

I doubt there's anything that can/will be done before the next CBA.

But it seems a safe bet that it will come up in the next one.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I would expect that the non-destination franchises will want this, and the destination franchises won't.

Imo, if the idea is to get star players (and players in general) to stay with teams longer without doing things to restrict their movement, this is a good way to do it.

Young, rich athletes are always going to want to go to places like L.A., Miami, etc. over Cleveland, OKC, etc. But the prospect of being able to keep a winning core together and maybe add pieces...may entice some guys to stick around longer.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Yeah, I just read it again.

The other owners actually want the penalties to be higher.

Only Lacob is interested in adding that caveat.

But, I'd imagine the Cavs, Memphis might be watching closely.

Agree, Gilbert would be one to back Lacob, my guess

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I doubt there's anything that can/will be done before the next CBA.

But it seems a safe bet that it will come up in the next one.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I would expect that the non-destination franchises will want this, and the destination franchises won't.

Imo, if the idea is to get star players (and players in general) to stay with teams longer without doing things to restrict their movement, this is a good way to do it.

Young, rich athletes are always going to want to go to places like L.A., Miami, etc. over Cleveland, OKC, etc. But the prospect of being able to keep a winning core together and maybe add pieces...may entice some guys to stick around longer.

I am not saying I'm opposed to it. Just that it's impossible to drop in with no plan

I do think ultimately it would be a good thing.

 

[trojanfan12]

Yeah, I think he's trying to plant the seeds for Dec 15 when they can negotiate the new CBA.

One thing he has in his favor?

Players Union should be all in because it means more money for some guys.

Imagine a scenario where the Thunder, Pistons, Cavs, Toronto, Memphis or Pelicans landed Wenbenyamma.

......and they had the ability to throw everyone a max.

Bruh.

I kinda get Lacob's point.

Why penalize us for drafting well.

The heavier penalties should go to teams like the Lakers, Clippers and Nets who traded for guys or signed them as free agents.

Devil's advocate for the Lakers, Clippers, Nets, etc....

"Why should we be penalized for being in a more desirable location?"

 

[msgkings322]

Devil's advocate for the Lakers, Clippers, Nets, etc....

"Why should we be penalized for being in a more desirable location?"

Because that's the whole point. You have that unfair advantage.

 

[trojanfan12]

I am not saying I'm opposed to it. Just that it's impossible to drop in with no plan

I do think ultimately it would be a good thing.

Yeah, I don't think anything can be done until the next CBA.

It's also possible that it gets talked about, but gets tabled until the next CBA to, as you suggest, allow more time to develop a plan.

 

[Wamu]

Oh, man...

Thoughts and prayers.

That's awful to hear. Hope he'll be okay.

 

[trojanfan12]

Because that's the whole point. You have that unfair advantage.

So being smart enough to pick a better location is an "unfair advantage"?

If I'm smart enough to open a sandwich shop in a busy strip mall and next door to a cannabis collective and someone else opens one in a remote part of the same city...I should be penalized?

 

[Mecca]

Devil's advocate for the Lakers, Clippers, Nets, etc....

"Why should we be penalized for being in a more desirable location?"

Yeah, that's fair too.

 

[msgkings322]

So being smart enough to pick a better location is an "unfair advantage"?

If I'm smart enough to open a sandwich shop in a busy strip mall and next door to a cannabis collective and someone else opens one in a remote part of the same city...I should be penalized?

LOL...the owners of teams in glamor cities didn't "pick a better location". Those cities themselves have advantages. I think you're kidding here but not sure.

But guess what? On your analogy the rent is higher in better store locations.

 

[Mecca]

Yeah, I don't think anything can be done until the next CBA.

It's also possible that it gets talked about, but gets tabled until the next CBA to, as you suggest, allow more time to develop a plan.

Either side can opt out in December.

That's why Lacob ate that 500k fine to get the idea out there.

Gotta assume demanding trades with almost half a decade left on your contract will be a point of contention as well.

 

[Shanemansj13]

 

[thunderc]

Devil's advocate for the Lakers, Clippers, Nets, etc....

"Why should we be penalized for being in a more desirable location?"

Devils advocate for everyone else, fuck those guys

 

[thunderc]

Either side can opt out in December.

That's why Lacob ate that 500k fine to get the idea out there.

Gotta assume demanding trades with almost half a decade left on your contract will be a point of contention as well.

Yeah and not playing just because