I am scared to death

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

This all brings me back to my constant questioning of why extensions are not worth more than opting out and re-signing. It's the dumbest system ever. If the league truly cared about guys staying with their own teams, they'd make it so extensions could pay more for longer and the player would have to make a sacrifice to hit free agency if they wanted to go elsewhere. 1 year of guaranteed money is nothing to most of these guys at this point because they are signing these 2nd deals when they are 25/26, not 30. That would give teams like the Wolves a fighting chance, because you could either extend Love or basically get his answer if he was thinking about leaving and get the process going for either getting better or trading him. The system should be designed for the team who drafts a player to have the best shot to keep him over the length of his career and they do it for the first contract with RFA, why don't they do it with the subsequent contracts by giving them the option to give the player a better deal if he extends his deal rather than opting out and signing a new one sometimes with the same team.

[mjs34]

Kahns, I agree that the system is ridiculous. The fact that Love has to opt out to get a full five year contract, rather than being able to extend him during the season for that same length, makes no sense whatsoever. You correct that it really puts the teams in a bind, not knowing whether to roll the dice, or just trade them when they can still get something back.

It falls on the union and the players, because they think they should have the right to choose where they live, and who they play with. I honestly don't think the amount of money would fix the problem because these guys make so much already that it really doesn't make a difference in lifestyle. Lebron, Wade and Bosh took a couple mil less to sign together on Miami.

I think they should at least have a continual RFA system for the top players so a team can match. Maybe a franchise player tag like in the NFL. At least they could minimize the collusion that took place in Miami.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I think RFA works for the first contract, but it would be unfair to allow it on later contracts. Just like it is stupid that you can franchise a guy in the NFL for two years instead of actually having to pay him what he wants (should just be able to do it once). I think you just have to give the teams the best chance to retain their own draft picks short of force like RFA and the current system doesn't really have that for 2nd free agency contracts. Most of the guys don't care about a 5th guaranteed year because not many of the all-star level players like Love have been burned by being up for a new deal a year shorter. It is the Monta Ellis level guys that get burned because they become role players as they age where guys like Lebron and Melo are still max players going into their 3rd FA deal. I put Love closer to Lebron and Melo than Monta. I think extending a player on his second deal should hike up the salary per year more than they can get in FA, provide that extra year and it should automatically add the option to add a no-trade clause to the deal. I think those three things can allow a team to have the best chance of retaining a guy for the factors they can control. Anything else like location or collusion, they can't control and again, they would have the advantage of knowing before the player can actually leave whether they want to test the market because extensions have dates during the season to get done so you would know well before the trade deadline. The players still get paid and the franchises don't get burned. This is why NBA politics are so stupid.

[mjs34]

I just don't think the money is a difference maker for the star players. Is Kevin Love going to stay somewhere like Minny to make 90 mil versus 70-80. I don't see it happening. It is funny you mentioned Ellis because he squawked at an extension for 3 years 35 mil. and ended up signing for 3/25. He actually burned himself.

Maybe the answer is to give teams a credit against the salary cap for re-signing players they drafted. That would give them an advantage by building through the draft. It would make it easier for a team like Minny to put quality guys around Love, without having to worry about the Lakers outspending them.

[markkbu [enjin:6588958]]

Didn't Stern say that you have to draft well?

[mjs34]

This kind of sums it up -

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/64040/learning-to-love-again-in-minnesota

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

This kind of sums it up -

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/64040/learning-to-love-again-in-minnesota

I didn't like that article when it came out, honestly. Sounded like another "Love's leaving" piece. Writer's tone made it come off that way.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Kahns, I agree that the system is ridiculous. The fact that Love has to opt out to get a full five year contract, rather than being able to extend him during the season for that same length, makes no sense whatsoever. You correct that it really puts the teams in a bind, not knowing whether to roll the dice, or just trade them when they can still get something back.

It falls on the union and the players, because they think they should have the right to choose where they live, and who they play with. I honestly don't think the amount of money would fix the problem because these guys make so much already that it really doesn't make a difference in lifestyle. Lebron, Wade and Bosh took a couple mil less to sign together on Miami.

I think they should at least have a continual RFA system for the top players so a team can match. Maybe a franchise player tag like in the NFL. At least they could minimize the collusion that took place in Miami.

I've been pretty clear on my thoughts about the last lockout in the past. It was largely a sham. The league said one thing... but their actions hinted at something else entirely.

It was never really about parity on the court as much as parity on the ledgers.

Currently, the system doesn't reward teams with homegrown talent nearly enough. The alleged punitive luxury tax was supposed to hinder teams from simply blowing through their budgets. Meh. I think we've already seen the teams more scared about the luxury tax, e.g., OKC. And possibly Indiana as soon as this offseason.

- A team like OKC or MN should be able to offer homegrown talent a SIGNIFICANT advantage to resign/extend. Especially, when a move to places like Texas or Florida offers other tax advantages to make losing $15M more palatable.

[Lipoli390]

I agree, Abe. The last lockout was a missed opportunity to get it right. On the other hand, smaller market teams like Indiana and OK City have put themselves in the championship hunt by making good basketball decisions -- especially good draft decisions. At the same time, the Nets spend money like there's no tomorrow and continue to struggle pathetically.

But I still wish the system had changed to more significantly favor signing your own "homegrown" talent.