Giannis signs supermax

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Every sport has a compensatory draft pick system except for the NBA. Why is the NBA behind in this regard?

[Monster]

Every sport has a compensatory draft pick system except for the NBA. Why is the NBA behind in this regard?

That's an interesting question I've wondered that also. Cam I'd be interested to hear if you have come up with a proposed system.

Even though the NBA is star driven I still believe there is a depth of talent that could be brought out of there was a true minor league system which the league has been working towards with the G-league. Hopefully the pandemic doesn't keep that movement from going forward. I think teams have seen the benefit to their rosters and more players are getting enough money as 2-way guys that it can continue to grow.

What if the lottery teams got the only 14 picks in a 3rd round when teams are able to stock roster more fully in their G-league teams and maybe an additional pot of money to sign players to their G-league affiliate franchise or additional contracts to basically expand their rosters? It may sound like a mostly hopeless idea to stock The bottom end of bad teams but there are some good players that have been undrafted or let go by other teams and then picked up. Danny Green, FVV, Covington, Christian Wood, Whiteside, Seth Curry are just a few guys I can think of off the top of my head. Maybe the bad teams won't make the best of these additional opportunities but I believe there is a depth of talent that COULD help teams improve.

Wait but how does this help keep stars? Look at the Wolves Ineptitude throughout their roster. More options could mean better role players would mean more wins and more competitive roster etc. Maybe they even hit pretty big and get the next FVV or Covington which would be a pretty significant piece.

That's just some random ideas maybe none of them are good but I just really want to see that minor league system and that would add more value to the idea of Comp pick that Cam said.

It's worth noting Rosas was one of the guys that was first using that system to actually do something useful for the NBA franchise. If all he did was do that here...it would be an improvement in that regard from other executives that often struggled developing a the bottom end of the roster. Having said that if that's all he does well obviously that's not gonna be enough. I really hope there is another G-league season because I want to see if the the success the Wolves had last season can continue. Maybe we have a coach in waiting in Iowa...or at least a very good developmental coach.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Money is not the answer to get hundred millionaires to stay put. In fact I don't think the solution is to try to hamstring franchises with all these incentives for max guys to stay because it doesn't make a difference and in a lot of cases hinders the teams when those deals don't work out. We lost a first round pick to ditch Wiggins. Same for Washington and Wall. Small markets are paying steep prices for trying to hang onto guys by giving them the max to stay when frequently that player isn't actually worth the max. These guys want to play with better players and in some cases their friends. There's no incentives you can build in that can deal with that reality.

At the end of the day the league needs to figure out proper draft compensation for when a max guy leaves their team either via FA or trade. The NBA doesn't have as many rounds to match the NFL's comp pick system but maybe you make it compensatory ping pong balls so that you can still try to win and build a winning culture AND have good lottery odds rather than having to lose to bottom out and get the best odds at a top pick. Lose a Karl Towns. Get a guaranteed top 5 lottery ball percentage chance and then you can try to win games and still have good lottery odds. Overpaying players out of necessity to keep them and tanking creating losing cultures is killing small markets and bad teams so they need to actually provide less pay incentives and provide more rebuilding tools where losing an elite player doesn't have to be a decade long death sentence because you can try to rebuild right away without needing to purposefully lose to do it. Get tanking under control and you'll see a lot more small to mid-market teams start to build better cultures and be able to not only build better teams around stars to give them a chance to keep them but they'll also be able to rebuild quickly as well if things go south. Players are going to work where they want in this new era so give the organizations that draft and develop that talent better tools to deal with the fallout from someone just not wanting to work there anymore.

I think a start is not having all that money up against the cap. Because you're right... a $40M third contract for guys around 30 is just a bad move for the franchise. So, give them salary cap relief. Count 1/2 of that money against the cap or something like that.

As for draft picks... Meh. Obviously, you've read enough of my stuff to know my thoughts on the Promise of Hope. I guess rewarding teams for losing star players with another draft pick... that they can HOPE gets to be as good as the first guy... only to see him walk too is something. But I'd prefer more parity in more markets. And I think money still talks, even in the era of billionaire athletes.



[Note: Speaking of money... I just saw a report that Giannis would have saved tens of millions if he signed with either Dallas or Miami via state income tax savings. That's a less-discussed issue... but one that can make a difference, too.]

[Lipoli390]

Giannis is different, and he proved that today. I understand what Abe is saying, but I think this is fantastic for small market teams. The Bucks have committed to surrounding Giannis with the talent necessary to win a title, including going over the luxury tax threshold. As long as they continue to try to be as competitive as possible, Giannis will be happy. The only thing I would question is why they didn't sack up and keep Brogdon. That looks like a big mistake in retrospect. But Giannis is good enough to be a draw for future free agents, even in that market.

I agree, Cool. Giannis isn't interested in glitz and glamour and doesn't care about the weather. He just wants to win and his preference is to stand his ground and win with the team that drafted him. That's not to say he will NEVER push for a trade down the road if things don't go well. But credit the organization for making good moves to surround him with the talent needed to be a perennial title contender. The Bucks will have at least two or three seasons during his 5-year deal to win a title before Giannis is at a point where he might push for a trade. But even then, as long as they contend every year, there's a good chance he'll stay.

Mid-market teams can still be contenders in the League. The Spurs proved that for many years. The Celtics remain contenders and, even thought they're iconic franchise, they're not a warm-weather or glitzy Hollywood destination. Toronto's a great city, but it's not LA or Miami and yet the Raptors won a championship and have been perennial contenders in recent years. Smaller market teams simply have fewer options and a smaller margin for error than the few warm-weather, large market glitzy franchises like LA and Miami. If the Wolves had a good front office, Giannis would be here and we never would have even heard of Bazz. Or in the alternative, a good front office would have drafted Jamal Murray, John Collins and Tyler Herro (at least two of those three, which is what Cam or I would have done). Then we wouldn't be talking about when KAT will want out.

I agree with those who think the NBA should take steps to incentivize better balance the League. But that may never happen. In the meantime, this is a good story for Milwaukee, small/mid-size market teams and the NBA. And in the end, there's no substitute for competence and good judgment.

[WildWolf2813]

Yes. It's nice to see this right now. Good for Giannis and Milwaukee fans. BUT...

Will it actually negate any potential and necessary changes that small market teams could have demanded in the next CBA? Because we might still see the next 10 "stars" demand trades to better perceived markets...

... the only difference now is that "But Giannis stayed" will be used every single time to refute that there's still a problem/disparity that exists.

What were those changes you wanted?

The league isn't built for teams like the Wolves to succeed but I don't think it's something that is legislated. Players are gonna do what they do, and they don't see the glory of winning here. Now, the Bucks have done everything they can. Their biggest move other than drafting Giannis was selling the team. They went from treadmill team with crappy arena and nondescript personality to having this brand new lease on life. They know what they're doing. There's no rule that can circumvent crap ownership.

It's beyond my pay grade... but I'd give teams/players more incentives for staying. The financial implications used to work when (1) players had to choose between $90M and $120M... not $200+M and $250M (2) fewer players were demanding out after signing long-term deals.

I called more player movement right after the last CBA was signed. Ostensibly, those contracts (and other changes) were supposed to help the smaller market teams. They had the opposite impact. I think Giannis is a different sort of cat, which is great, but nothing would stop him from demanding a trade tomorrow.

We can live in a world where we run with the "But you get to move between jobs, why can't they?" angle... and completely ignore foundation of sports is built on the thin guise of loyalty between fans, teams and even players.

I fully understand more Player Entitlement is GOOD for the league. And nothing will change until it costs owners money. As a fan, I'd rather not root for a second-rate team that is always working at a disadvantage.

You and I are the minority. This league is built to cater to the fan who roots for the player over the team with few exceptions. If you'd rather not root for a second-rate team, then the league won't be too bothered since they know you'll probably just follow a player instead. There's people who just follow certain guys and that makes up a big chunk of that team's fanbase. Where I'm at, I get to see both. You have your hardcore Knicks fans, but then across the river you have a Nets fanbase that's really just fans who really love Kyrie and fans who really love Durant and don't have a connection to the Nets franchise.