- Thread starter
- #1
michaeljordan_fan
Well-Known Member
Would this help eliminate the "super-teams" and increase parity in the league?
The real question is that what the league is actually looking for.Would this help eliminate the "super-teams" and increase parity in the league?
I don't care much for parity because this league always been one when you usually would have 4-5 teams that can actually win a title yearly but the super teams need to go. The fact that most of us knew on July 4th, 2016 who would be playing in the NBA finals is not a good look IMO. And likely we'll all know the teams participating in the 2018 finals by July 4th of this year.
The league has always had dominant teams. The very nature of basketball makes that inevitable.
A hard cap wouldn't make Sacramento a more more desirable place to play.
Theres always been a few dominant teams but there were also a host of a very good teams or other great teams in the league which provided a competitive NBA especially in the playoffs . Big difference from today. 2 dominant teams and NO competition
Theres always been a few dominant teams but there were also a host of a very good teams or other great teams in the league which provided a competitive NBA especially in the playoffs . Big difference from today. 2 dominant teams and NO competition
it would heavily penalize teams that can put together a good team.Would this help eliminate the "super-teams" and increase parity in the league?
The whole point of the soft cap is to give home teams flexibility to keep home grown talent.
A hard cap would likely hinder dominant teams as they would be limited on the number of top contracts they could pay out. However it would likely make guys like Lebron even more dominant because other teams wouldn't be able to build a full team of all stars. Thus the "In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king" rule would apply. Lebron's team would not be as effective but his team would dominate more because other teams would be weaker.