2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[GameTime]

6 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

As expected, but seeing those numbers in print 

 

Glad that dream is over with.

[JeffS17]

10 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Something has gotta give.

Well, if they want to go Phoenix Suns route, here's what gives (the rest of the roster):

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, MarylandHawk said:

Look in the notes you posted in the new CBA differences. I am pretty sure I read starting in the 24/25 season, teams will only be allowed to only give out a maximum of 3 years in a max contract. 

...I'll have to look again, but I don't remember that at all.

41 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

If the 2nd apron where all the restrictions come in is set at 34% above CAP then in 25-26 is could be set at around $268M.  If the Celtics have Tatum ($70M supermax), Brown ($56M supermax), and KP ($30M on current contract), that's $156M for 3 players.  That leaves them $112M to fill out their roster with 12 players or about $9M per player on average.  Something has gotta give.  It may not be crippling, but they won't be able to keep White, Brogdon, Al, Rob Williams, Pritchard, etc... at all of their MVs.  

They can keep all of the bolded above since they are their own players,  there will just be harsher consequences and limited back end roster players. 

Here's the thing, most teams will be in the same boat if they draft well and have 2 max contracts.

[REHawksFan]

2 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

...I'll have to look again, but I don't remember that at all.

They can keep all of the bolded above since they are their own players,  there will just be harsher consequences and limited back end roster players. 

Here's the thing, most teams will be in the same boat if they draft well and have 2 max contracts.

Isn't there a difference between max contracts and super max contracts?  I would think having 2 super max deals is going to be much more debilitating than just 2 max deals when you consider the penalties that go along with the 2nd apron.  Trae is on the supermax but his 25-26 salary will be $46M compared to $70M for Tatum plus $56M for Brown.  That's with a $200M cap.  

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, MarylandHawk said:

Look in the notes you posted in the new CBA differences. I am pretty sure I read starting in the 24/25 season, teams will only be allowed to only give out a maximum of 3 years in a max contract. 

I reread the breakdown, I don't see this.

 

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2023/04/running-list-of-changes-in-nbas-new-collective-bargaining-agreement.html

 

[Peoriabird]

1 hour ago, REHawksFan said:

If the 2nd apron where all the restrictions come in is set at 34% above CAP then in 25-26 is could be set at around $268M.  If the Celtics have Tatum ($70M supermax), Brown ($56M supermax), and KP ($30M on current contract), that's $156M for 3 players.  That leaves them $112M to fill out their roster with 12 players or about $9M per player on average.  Something has gotta give.  It may not be crippling, but they won't be able to keep White, Brogdon, Al, Rob Williams, Pritchard, etc... at all of their MVs.  

Somehow fans on a message board don't even understand how the salary cap works.  They think you can just sign anybody you want without restrictions.  I think this why many think the Hawks should just throw money around and it won't cost the Hawks at all.  Even Schlenk warned that if you missed on a draft pick it won't cost your team nearly as much as it would if you screwed yourself in free agency or dramatically over paid for a player in a trade etc.  There are consequences people for not matching the salary paid to a player to his talents and contribution to winning period!!!

[JayBirdHawk]

16 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Isn't there a difference between max contracts and super max contracts?  I would think having 2 super max deals is going to be much more debilitating than just 2 max deals when you consider the penalties that go along with the 2nd apron.  Trae is on the supermax but his 25-26 salary will be $46M compared to $70M for Tatum plus $56M for Brown.  That's with a $200M cap.  

Regular max for a rookie is 25%...supermax 30%.

Regular max for a vet is 30%....supermax is 35%

[AHF]

12 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Regular max for a rookie is 25%...supermax 30%.

Regular max for a vet is 30%....supermax is 35%

 

1 hour ago, REHawksFan said:

I don't see how it's not ultra problematic with the new CBA.  In the 25-26 season, Boston will have 2 players making 70% of the cap. Add in KP who is making nearly 20% of the CAP and that's 90% of the CAP on 3 players.  Even considering the increase in CAP annually, we are talking about nearly 155K on 3 players when the cap is expected to be $198M.  How is that not more problematic given the restrictions imposed by the new cba?  

 

36 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

...I'll have to look again, but I don't remember that at all.

They can keep all of the bolded above since they are their own players,  there will just be harsher consequences and limited back end roster players. 

Here's the thing, most teams will be in the same boat if they draft well and have 2 max contracts.

It will make them less flexible and, depending on how willing their owner is to spend money, it can limit their depth.  They are well positioned right now if willing to spend (and this contract screams I'm willing to spend to me) since they already have good depth and can always resign them.  As you push out into the future, they could end up being prevented from doing certain deals they would have done under the last CBA and prevented from signing or trading for certain players they would have under the last CBA.  I guess I just see that as less of a dramatic thing for owners willing to spend than some.  I certainly don't think this is hearkening in a new era of ultra tight spending or a fear of having multiple max contracts on the same roster.  We've already seen teams that were a few max guys and mostly cheap fill-ins do just fine and I can't imagine an NBA where people are handing out $40M contracts to the likes of Fred VanVleet but suddenly scared to pay another $20M for Jaylen Brown.  

I would still predict big contracts clustered on the rosters of teams that go deep into the playoffs on a year in and year out basis.  I definitely don't think having 2-3 huge contracts is going to be a fundamentally flawed way of building a team.  

(This doesn't mean that every team that stacks a handful of max or supermax contracts will be successful.  Any team building approach fails if you make the wrong decisions.)

[Hawkmoor]

The Celtics don't normally make these kinds of moves.

 

 

 

[Peoriabird]

15 minutes ago, AHF said:

I would still predict big contracts clustered on the rosters of teams that go deep into the playoffs on a year in and year out basis.  I definitely don't think having 2-3 huge contracts is going to be a fundamentally flawed way of building a team.  

(This doesn't mean that every team that stacks a handful of max or supermax contracts will be successful.  Any team building approach fails if you make the wrong decisions.)

Totally disagree!  Can't name 1 championship team constructed like this.  Miami players took a pay cut to play on the same team.  Even Jordan played for less to get the kind of support he needed.  If you pay players like Brown more than the MVP of the league, the team with the MVP will win every time.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

1 hour ago, REHawksFan said:

I don't see how it's not ultra problematic with the new CBA.  In the 25-26 season, Boston will have 2 players making 70% of the cap. Add in KP who is making nearly 20% of the CAP and that's 90% of the CAP on 3 players.  Even considering the increase in CAP annually, we are talking about nearly 155K on 3 players when the cap is expected to be $198M.  How is that not more problematic given the restrictions imposed by the new cba?  

 

It's not problematic because it's much harder to find star level players, than it is to replace average starters.

And if you're fortunate enough to acquire 2+ star players, that has been an element to being a top 10 team in most years.

Look at the Lakers. They languished all year because one or both of their stars were out. But once they got both of them back, that team took off in the playoffs and made the WCF, even if they did get swept.

Fans of franchises that aren't used to spending money, will say that building a balanced team and staying "financially flexible", is the key to success.  But financial flexibility doesn't win you games.

Stars do.

The whole point of staying "flexible" would be to put yourself in position to obtain a star player. You don't stay flexible, to spend the bare minimum, so that you continue to say that you're staying "flexible".

The team's that want to spend, will continue to spend. They'll simply pay top dollar for the stars, and fill the role playing spots with low cost specialists.

And that will be a successful business model.

[Peoriabird]

7 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Fans of franchises that aren't used to spending money, will say that building a balanced team and staying "financially flexible", is the key to success.  But financial flexibility doesn't win you games.

Stars do.

 

But you can't pay Star players like they are superstars.  That is a losing or treadmill strategy at best

[pro9wu]

Twitter / X is ruthless:

 

[MarylandHawk]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

...I'll have to look again, but I don't remember that at all.

They can keep all of the bolded above since they are their own players,  there will just be harsher consequences and limited back end roster players. 

Here's the thing, most teams will be in the same boat if they draft well and have 2 max contracts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shams Charania

 

@ShamsCharania

·

Apr 17

Sources: New NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement numbers: - Non-Taxpayer MLE increases 7.5%: $10.5M to 12.2M - Room MLE increases 30%: $5.5M to $7.6M; max contract length now 3 years - New Second-Round Pick Exception: 3-4 year contracts up to minimum salary for third-year player

[JayBirdHawk]

4 minutes ago, MarylandHawk said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shams Charania

 

@ShamsCharania

·

Apr 17

Sources: New NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement numbers: - Non-Taxpayer MLE increases 7.5%: $10.5M to 12.2M - Room MLE increases 30%: $5.5M to $7.6M; max contract length now 3 years - New Second-Round Pick Exception: 3-4 year contracts up to minimum salary for third-year player

That's just for the Non-Tax and  MLE contracts.

[Final_quest]

6 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Take home message to the Hawks...Keep your bargin players signed to long term contracts as long as you can and watch the other teams self destruct!

Hmmmm…. I’ll throw a caution flag on this thought.  Some bargain players yes, but not all bargain players.  

[Peoriabird]

Just now, Final_quest said:

Hmmmm…. I’ll throw a caution flag on this thought.  Some bargain players yes, but not all bargain players.  

A bargain is a bargain which is a player who is paid less than what they are worth like Jokic.

[MarylandHawk]

25 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

That's just for the Non-Tax and  MLE contracts.

Boo. I knew you would clear up my cloudy thoughts. Lol. 

[RedDawg#8]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

A bargain is a bargain which is a player who is paid less than what they are worth like Jokic.

How many Jokic’s are there in the NBA and how do we convince one to come to Atlanta for less than his worth?

I’ll wait

[Spud2nique]

11 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

As expected, but seeing those numbers in print 

 

I gave you the cycle of emojis Burd! But seriously I’m confused at the price tag ? Is that.. I mean the highest paid ever!!! 
 

I’m a huge Brown fan. I don’t pay him that no way, he is gonna break down unfortunately sooner or later plus you can get another Brown I believe more readily in the next few years with the kids comin up.

Happy the Celts did this as a Hawks fan. Maybe I’m wrong, .