The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

With Golden State now getting Demarcus Cousins, they're super stacked.  The best team in the league is adding another superstar.

I think that this is largely due to the way that the cap works in the NBA.  Because the max salary is where it is, it makes a ton of guys max players and equates guys like Lebron with guys who aren't nearly as good as Lebron.  This incentivizes guys to group up or go to markets that they otherwise wouldn't or otherwise seek a power other than money.  Money almost takes a back seat.

I'm not incredibly invested in the NBA and I don't hate the Warriors, but it's hard to get excited when you go into the season, pretty much knowing who's going to win.

I wonder what they can do to spread that out a little bit.  I've always been a fan of a loyalty system where you can pay guys a higher percentage of their salary that doesn't count against the cap, that increases as they're with the team longer.

I think it has more to do with it only takes a few players to stack a team ... as the heat showed. I'll get beat up over this but I never thought basketball is that "professional" anyways. In my opinion if a kid can come in from high school and compete then how professional can it really be?

By rule, a kid may not "come in from high school and compete" in the NBA.  However, that is allowed in the NHL, as Connor McDavid showed.  But I'm guessing that's not what you were talking about.

If we're talking about "unprofessional" leagues with kids competing, it seems to me that MLB has always been the king of high school players jumping to the pros in less than a year.

I'm not super invested in the NBA anymore and prefer college basketball but I might stat watching again now that the Lakers have a superstar again. I'm really tired of seeing the same teams in the finals and didn't watch a minute of it last year. At least we know the East is going to have a different representative now.

As long as it's nots the Lakers and Celtics every year like it was in the 80's.....whoops. :)

Pappy, when the Lakers made it to the Finals 8 times during the '80s, that was the golden age of the NBA that saved the league.  And the era when the Bulls won the Finals 6 times in 8 years was also amazing and great for the sport.  But now that the Warriors have made the Finals 4 years in a row and won 3 of them, the NBA is boring and broken.  ::)

I'll admit to the hypocrisy but so should most people. Seeing the same teams when I have little vested interest is boring. Seeing the same teams when you are vested is a completely different feeling.

Food for thought: Over the last 17 years, Belichick's Patriots have been to 12 conference championships and 8 Super Bowls.  A good chunk of their success is because players are willing to take below market deals to play there for a ring... just like the Warriors.  This has been going on for much longer than the current NBA superteam era, yet you never hear the media complain about it.  Why?  Because it's Boston, not the Bay Area.

The KG/Pierce/Allen Celtics started this superteam trend, and yet everyone points at LeBron as the villain.  Why?  Because LeBron's team was in Miami, not Boston.

There is a difference that always needs pointed out. Boston did not start the trend as we see it now. Of the big three, they drafted one and traded for two. Since Lebron moved to Miami the trend has been to use free agency. I'm not arguing for or against either, just saying the comparison isn't right.

as fun as that fantasy is, miami drafted wade and traded for both lebron and bosh, none of the three were free agent signings.

It's all splitting hairs.  LBJ and Bosh were basically sign-and-trade hostage situations where their original teams could either trade them or get nothing, and KG had similarly demanded a trade from MIN.  It's like giving OKC credit for "organically" building a superteam by... trading for Paul George and Melo who were demanding to get out of town.

And for the record, CLE traded for Kevin Love, drafted Kyrie, and technically drafted LeBron.

If you want to play the game that way fine. Bosch and James came in on sign and trade deals, after they announced their free agent intentions to join Miami. That makes little difference in the fact the had already announced.

They were both re-signed by their original teams and traded to MIA for cap/contract purposes.  MIA gave two picks to TOR and five picks to CLE.

After they announced they were leaving for Miami. The destination was set. Calling it a trade is almost a farce. What did Cleveland get? Tell me they make the same deal had James been under contract.

MIA gave up a total of seven picks for the pair.  That's hardly a farce.

I'm not going to keep a back and forth going. I really don't care how teams build themselves but Cleveland would never consider that trade with James under contract. NBA draft picks can be counted on less than NFL picks. That is my only point here. Those guys made their intentions known and worked the system to maximize their contract and still go to their free agency choice.

So do the trades of Kevin Garnett, Paul George, Melo, and (soon to be) Kawhi "count"?  All of them demanded to be traded, greatly depressing their value (why trade away assets for someone when you can wait and get them for free), and Melo specifically has a no-trade clause that literally allowed him to pick which teams he could be traded to.

technically right is the best kind of right

This is why I don't watch the NBA anymore.  The players themselves are GMs and you might as well pencil in the two NBA Finals candidates before the season even starts.

i don't have a problem with free agency in sports. Go sign a contract with whichever team you want when you're a free agent, for whatever reasons you want.
If teams don't like that .. they should make themselves more appealing to free agents.

Apologies by me (Dave Gray).

I was trying to quote this post to say that it was an interesting point.  Instead, I accidentally deleted it.

My bad, Buc.

I don't have a problem with stacked teams, there have always been dynasties in professional sports.  Injuries, age, and salary caps eventually put an end to dynasties.  However, from the fan perspective, unless my team occasional is able to win a championship then I am put off (with the exception of football where I inexplicably still follow the Dolphins).  Basketball is the easiest sport to stack a team, since there are only 5 players on the court at any one time; and the current system allows unfair collusion.  Although teams are not supposed to contact free agents and players under contract until certain dates, the players themselves collude to join a team and play together, this is wrong IMO.  The main thing that turns me off as a fan is when a Lebron James type player leaves his team, which has gone to consecutive finals, not for money, but for some unknown selfish reason.  Sure it's his right to do it, but I'm not going to be a fan of his for this reason, and that's my right.  And ultimately there will be other fans like myself that will stop watching, and that will hurt their product.

The unknown selfish reason is probably the fact that Cleveland hasn't done shit to build anything around LeBron in Cleveland, and LeBron wants to at least challenge for another title before he hangs em up.

While we're on the subject, can someone explain to me why Miami had to trade for Lebron?  Couldn't he have just let his contract lapse entirely and then signed with the HEAT so that they didn't lose picks?

I find this puzzling, because when players elect to take more money instead of sacrificing pay for a roster that can win, they are also heavily criticized.

Miami didn't have to trade for LeBron or Bosh, but by doing so, they acquired the original teams' player rights, which means they are eligible to exceed the cap to re-sign them, offer them super-max deals, etc.

Not to hijack but maybe we should just stop giving a shit about LeBron? 

It's the way that free agency is handled in the NBA.   Setting "max contracts" for players was the worst thing they could've possibly done.  Now players themselves act as GMs and collude to go to a team with the most cap room.  That team then wins titles for the next 4-5 years while the rest of the league rots in hell.   

They need to re-make free agency in the NBA.  No max contracts, no "mid level exceptions" no nothing.  Just a hard salary cap that you cannot exceed.  You can designate one player on your roster as the "marquee" player and his contract doesn't count against the cap.

A hard salary cap would do literally nothing to prevent players from teaming up, as 1) they already take less money to team up, and 2) under a hard salary cap all players would make less money than under the current soft cap.  The only thing a hard cap would do is make superteams cheaper for the owners.

Do you not like athletes who reach the pinnacle of their profession? Or is it just the media's infatuation that has ya grumpy?

If people stopped caring about LeBron, people would stop caring about the NBA.

That's not true at all, they practically overhauled the team twice last year for him.  He's been to the finals for what, six consecutive years?  As recent news is surfacing he is putting forth entertainment projects in LA.

I have no doubt that LeBron is looking at entertainment projects in LA. Hell, he's been playing in that sandbox for at least five years now.

That said, if you take a look at the supporting cast of last year's Cavs though, you can't really tell me that he had even an average team around him. Take LeBron off of last year's Cavs squad, and Cleveland would've been contending with my beloved Phoenix Suns for the #1 overall pick.

Add in the fact that he reeeeeally hates Dan Gilbert, and I think that LA was definitely the smartest play for LeBron.

To be clear, the first overhaul was not "for him." It was for Kyrie, who was less interested in winning than he was in being independent.