|
|
Post by jmost on Jul 25, 2023 11:53:26 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't know how I feel about this. On the one hand, I don't think JB is an elite player. On the other hand, I don't know that the Celtics had much of a choice. They weren't about to let him walk away next summer for nothing. And he might not have signed an extension for anything less.
We just have to hope that JB continues to improve and that the team finds a way to utilize his strengths and hide his weaknesses.
|
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 25, 2023 13:52:27 GMT -5
I'm happy for Jaylen. By all accounts he's a decent, thoughtful man. But my god, that is a lot of the salary cap dedicated to one guy. Hopefully he keeps improving. I also think having Brown locked up long term is a good asset to have in case a major star (pleeeeease let it be Luka) starts demanding a trade.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Jul 25, 2023 15:04:15 GMT -5
I was thinking along the same lines. Or at least that having JB under contract, and with no opt-out for the full five years, makes him more tradable.
I wish I felt differently, but there is no one on our team that I wouldn't trade if the right opportunity presented itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 12, 2023 12:45:47 GMT -5
I think the NBA supermax has already gotten out of hand, and has to be tweaked. Proposal - need to make all-NBA in (2) of (3) seasons.
I think Brown is a max contract player, which should be reserved for perennial all-stars. However, as a supermax contract player, BOS is now boxed in. The second tax apron essentially strips teams of any team building options.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Aug 19, 2023 9:02:08 GMT -5
I'd prefer to see the supermax reduced from 35% of the salary cap to something more like 20-25%. When you're making that much, whether it's 30 mil a year or 50 mil a year makes no difference on lifestyle or financial security. It's just a score-keeping thing, a status thing. Reducing the percentage of the cap devoted to supermax players would be better for the other players and for team building.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 19, 2023 12:55:24 GMT -5
I'd prefer to see the supermax reduced from 35% of the salary cap to something more like 20-25%. When you're making that much, whether it's 30 mil a year or 50 mil a year makes no difference on lifestyle or financial security. It's just a score-keeping thing, a status thing. Reducing the percentage of the cap devoted to supermax players would be better for the other players and for team building. I think the last few CBAs was the direct result when the superstar players are involved in the negotiations. Max, and super max contracts benefits them. |
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Aug 19, 2023 13:17:57 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see what kind of contracts we would see if there were no dollar or year limits. What does Lebron get in 2010? 10 year/500 million? I'm pretty sure the contract KG signed with the Wolves in 1998 is the reason the owners fought for max contracts in the next cba negotiations, which led to the strike shortened 98-99 season.
Brown is a great players and seems like a good dude, but man he is gonna be eating up a lot of cap space. Here's hoping the next tv deal bumps the cap up significantly. The one plus is that he is still a great player, and even on that deal he is tradeable. I'm hoping he can be the main piece moved if another mega-star decides they want out (fingers crossed for Luka or Giannis). Jaylen plus 3 unprotected firsts would be a hard offer for almost any other team to beat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 19, 2023 23:33:00 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see what kind of contracts we would see if there were no dollar or year limits. What does Lebron get in 2010? 10 year/500 million? I'm pretty sure the contract KG signed with the Wolves in 1998 is the reason the owners fought for max contracts in the next cba negotiations, which led to the strike shortened 98-99 season. Brown is a great players and seems like a good dude, but man he is gonna be eating up a lot of cap space. Here's hoping the next tv deal bumps the cap up significantly. The one plus is that he is still a great player, and even on that deal he is tradeable. I'm hoping he can be the main piece moved if another mega-star decides they want out (fingers crossed for Luka or Giannis). Jaylen plus 3 unprotected firsts would be a hard offer for almost any other team to beat. I speculate NBA contract would be similar to LIV golf in amount, however length I am not sure, because basketball seems like the type of sport where performance could dramatically drop-off. If Brown was 1 (like top 5-10 players), there would be no debate, however Brown is anywhere between a 2 (11-20) to a 3 (21-30). |
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Aug 20, 2023 19:08:28 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see what kind of contracts we would see if there were no dollar or year limits. What does Lebron get in 2010? 10 year/500 million? I'm pretty sure the contract KG signed with the Wolves in 1998 is the reason the owners fought for max contracts in the next cba negotiations, which led to the strike shortened 98-99 season. Brown is a great players and seems like a good dude, but man he is gonna be eating up a lot of cap space. Here's hoping the next tv deal bumps the cap up significantly. The one plus is that he is still a great player, and even on that deal he is tradeable. I'm hoping he can be the main piece moved if another mega-star decides they want out (fingers crossed for Luka or Giannis). Jaylen plus 3 unprotected firsts would be a hard offer for almost any other team to beat. I agree, but as I recall another serious issue at the time was that there was no rookie slot system. I think Glenn Robinson made some absurd amount at the time and the players could sorta hold teams hostage. It was especially a serious problem for a small market team like the Bucks. |
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Aug 20, 2023 20:10:55 GMT -5
I think the Brown contract will result in tweaking the formula for who is eligible for supermax. They will ultimately make less players eligible for less money.
What I am veeerrryyyy curious about is how big sports are going to evolve in the next 15 years. I think streaming has the ability to take them higher or ruin them. I think if they try to go the pay per view route (and I kinda think they might) it will be a total disaster for them and I won't feel sorry for them one iota if they implode. If they make the games unaffordable to watch and to attend they'll destroy themselves, and their only hope will be a massive increase in viewers overseas.
I think we're already seeing some sports making mistakes. I think the Pac 12 doesn't exist any more because they failed. They failed to make a viable cable channel similar to the Big Ten network and the ACC network and the SEC network. They failed to grow their league by adding teams like San Diego State. They failed. The ACC may be up next with a contract that runs through 2036 (or that could save them).
I think NESN is dead. $30 a month for their streaming? What a joke. And in turn that's less jerseys sold and less tickets, parking, and concessions sold. I virtually do not care at all about the Red Sox now. And the Bruins are up next.
|
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Aug 21, 2023 1:47:33 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see what kind of contracts we would see if there were no dollar or year limits. What does Lebron get in 2010? 10 year/500 million? I'm pretty sure the contract KG signed with the Wolves in 1998 is the reason the owners fought for max contracts in the next cba negotiations, which led to the strike shortened 98-99 season. Brown is a great players and seems like a good dude, but man he is gonna be eating up a lot of cap space. Here's hoping the next tv deal bumps the cap up significantly. The one plus is that he is still a great player, and even on that deal he is tradeable. I'm hoping he can be the main piece moved if another mega-star decides they want out (fingers crossed for Luka or Giannis). Jaylen plus 3 unprotected firsts would be a hard offer for almost any other team to beat. I agree, but as I recall another serious issue at the time was that there was no rookie slot system. I think Glenn Robinson made some absurd amount at the time and the players could sorta hold teams hostage. It was especially a serious problem for a small market team like the Bucks. Yeah it's wild how much rookies used to get in the NBA and NFL. Sam Bradford was the last #1 overall pick to make a ton of money before the rookie salary cap was introduced. I think the rookie cap is a good thing. I don't miss the days of first round picks holding out well into the season. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 23, 2023 23:04:44 GMT -5
I think the Brown contract will result in tweaking the formula for who is eligible for supermax. They will ultimately make less players eligible for less money. What I am veeerrryyyy curious about is how big sports are going to evolve in the next 15 years. I think streaming has the ability to take them higher or ruin them. I think if they try to go the pay per view route (and I kinda think they might) it will be a total disaster for them and I won't feel sorry for them one iota if they implode. If they make the games unaffordable to watch and to attend they'll destroy themselves, and their only hope will be a massive increase in viewers overseas. I think we're already seeing some sports making mistakes. I think the Pac 12 doesn't exist any more because they failed. They failed to make a viable cable channel similar to the Big Ten network and the ACC network and the SEC network. They failed to grow their league by adding teams like San Diego State. They failed. The ACC may be up next with a contract that runs through 2036 (or that could save them). I think NESN is dead. $30 a month for their streaming? What a joke. And in turn that's less jerseys sold and less tickets, parking, and concessions sold. I virtually do not care at all about the Red Sox now. And the Bruins are up next. Agree. That failed business model today is the NHL. The issue with max, or supermax contracts is that every player thinks they are worth it, when there are only 24 or so players worth it, then it has a domino effect to the next tier. |
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Aug 24, 2023 12:37:44 GMT -5
I don't understand why NESN decided to set their price so high. I can't imagine they are getting anywhere near $30 from Comcast or other outlets for the right to carry NESN. If I had to guess I'd say they are aren't getting more than $10 per month per subscriber. ESPN supposedly gets just over $9. If NESN charged $10 per month I bet they'd get a ton of subscribers that are currently just going without. That includes me. I'd sign up tomorrow if they dropped their price to something reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 25, 2023 23:25:15 GMT -5
I don't understand why NESN decided to set their price so high. I can't imagine they are getting anywhere near $30 from Comcast or other outlets for the right to carry NESN. If I had to guess I'd say they are aren't getting more than $10 per month per subscriber. ESPN supposedly gets just over $9. If NESN charged $10 per month I bet they'd get a ton of subscribers that are currently just going without. That includes me. I'd sign up tomorrow if they dropped their price to something reasonable. Every business is increasing their prices, "just because they can", which will result in fewer customers @higher price, because customers income has not increased at the same rate as inflation. |
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Aug 26, 2023 9:10:32 GMT -5
I think a lot of people, including myself, are just saying "No, I won't pay that". $30 per month for 1 station is way out of line with other offerings. The thing is, I bet they'd make way more money if they charged half as much.
|
|
