Hard Salary Cap?

[Med_Phys]

What if the Jazz are waiting/hoping for a hard salary cap with the new CBA? Many around here, including myself, would love to see some bold moves by the Jazz FO. However, ideas being thrown around like trading for Brand or Maggette add long term salary as do almost all sign and trades for Boozer. IF there is a hard salary cap with the new CBA, I can't fault the FO for not wanting to take on long-term salary. Taking that into consideration, maybe the best moves we as fanz can hope for are ones similar to the following:
AK for Hinrich (only has one year under the new CBA) and filler (on cheap and/or expiring contracts)
Booze (S&T) for Dampier (wholly unguaranteed for next year) and Beaubois

Given that the Jazz have essentially operated under a hard cap (luxury tax) the last several years (except this year), I really like the Jazz' chances of winning on an equal playing field that the hard salary cap would bring. Thoughts?

 

[Harambe]

I'm all for a hard cap. I guarantee we'd have better dispertion of titles.

 

[GVC]

AK for Hinrich (only has one year under the new CBA) and filler (on cheap and/or expiring contracts)

Uh, AK only has one year left on his contract as well.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I'm all for a hard cap. I guarantee we'd have better dispertion of titles.

Yeah, I read that totally wrong.






...





As for the cap. Possibly the Jazz are waiting, but I would expect it's business as usual since the Jazz aren't out to be financially irresponsible anyway.

 

[billyshelby]

No way the Players Association ever allows a hard cap. They'll happily lockout over that. The owners would have to have irrefutable evidence that like half the franchises will be insolvent without one. They can't substantiate that claim. Like any labor relation, they'll compromise on a 'harder' soft cap. As GVC formerly stated, the Alan Houston Amnesty provision could be revisited.

 

[Qman]

I would think making all contracts only guarranteed for 2 years is going to be a bigger push.

 

[carolinajazz]

I would think making all contracts only guaranteed for 2 years is going to be a bigger push.

....I'm hoping for a long, hard LOCKOUT.....that bring down salaries to about 5 million per year for the most talented players....but your guaranteed for only 2 years makes alot of success, too!

 

[Rimcheck]

Lockout question. If the players lockout, they don't get paid right? There are many mid level NBA players who would be in a lot of trouble maintaining their current lifestyle if they missed a full year worth of salary. I don't know if they would all be willing to do that. I am all for a hard cap, but then again the compromise for the players would likely be signing bonuses. That would leave teams like LA, NY, and Boston still in the drivers seat with the additional money to throw around. Plus if signing bonuses wouldn't have to be matched like the luxury tax, there would be some insane bonuses.
Realistically, I would like to see partially guaranteed contracts so teams don't get stuck with Brand or Arenas.

 

[One Brow]

I think a hard cap would just make it easier for large markets to get players. The more you will be depending on marketing for income, the bigger teh market you wnat to go to.

 

[YB85]

....I'm hoping for a long, hard LOCKOUT.....that bring down salaries to about 5 million per year for the most talented players....but your guaranteed for only 2 years makes alot of success, too!

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to carolinajazz again.

Damn.

 

[GVC]

I think a hard cap would just make it easier for large markets to get players. The more you will be depending on marketing for income, the bigger teh market you wnat to go to.

But those same teams can get those players now (the hard cap wouldn't affect marketing possibilities, I assume), get more of them AND pay them more. I don't get your argument here at all.

 

[One Brow]

But those same teams can get those players now (the hard cap wouldn't affect marketing possibilities, I assume), get more of them AND pay them more. I don't get your argument here at all.

With a soft cap, teams can at least pay their own players more than they can be signed for as free agents. When you are the 3rd-4th best player on a team, the team can pay to retain you.

A true hard cap would allow every team 1-2 max players, and a lot of low-salary players that are comming off the waiver wire. If you're one of the best players on the waiver wire, and you can sign for about the same amount in Chicago or in Utah, your finances improve greatly by signing in Chicago.