question about player's SALARY

[cyman3]

lets use JASON KIDD as an example.

the guy, at one point, was considered as top 2 NBA MVP candidate (Tim Duncan won it but many believed that Jason Kidd was the real MVP). then he goes in the offseason as a free agent, and u have almost every team willing to offer him the MAX contract he wants. SA was even willing to part ways w/ Paker to let Kidd come in and start. However, Kidd stayed with the Nets for the max contract and every year he gets paid more and more ($$$ per year).

now, its safe to say that towards the END of his contract (2008/2009 season), the guy wont be worth $21 million. in fact, he prob be labelled as one of those "overpaid" players by then. but in the beginning of the contract, at 12 or 13 million a year- he was worth EVERY penny.

that being said, how come they DONT set up contracts so that the salary declines by the year (same contract in terms of $$$ and number of years)? how come salary has TO INCREASE, every year? wouldnt the option of having salary decrease per year help EVERYONE out?

Who this helps out

1)GMs with team management- for ex, if KIDD was paid $21 million at the beginning it would be no problem. As his salary per year decreases, it works out perfectly as u set up space for back then rookie RICHARD JEFFERSON.

2)the PLAYER himself- remember when JUWAN HOWARD had that nasty contract? he was one heck of a player, but he just wasnt worth that HUGE contract. its not his fault. i mean, would u DECLINE a huge offer for ur services? night in and night out, he did his best but the fans didnt appreciate it. the fans were REALLY hard on him and made his life difficult. now, if his contract decreased every year- it would be easier to trade him as the years go by. not to mention, he could keep every CENT of the contract.

another example is JASON KIDD. GMs love KIDD and would love to trade for him and give the NETS a very presentable offer. however, w/ his age increasing and his injury status- they're not willing to commit to jason kidd knowing that his contract only increases. but if it DECREASES as the years go by, i think more teams would be willing to take a risk and go after KIDD. I mean, at the end- u have an overpaid player at 12 million... which isint as bad as $20+ million.

-------------------------------

so my question is, how come a players salary has to increase by the year? why cant it decrease? (assuming that contract + number of years are equivalent).

doesnt the NFL do that? cuz i remember MADDEN FRANCHISE MODE, u are able to sign players with contracts using decreasing, constant, or increasing salaries per year.

[Nicholasp27]

if they did that, then good luck staying under the salary cap

this summer we sign redd to a max contract...instead of paying him in the teens of millions, we'd have to pay him over 20mil, or almost HALF of our cap space...

but, if they did the cap by the total amount that u owe the player till contract ends divided by number of years left, then that'd be nice

give someone

25

18

12

10

8

5

instead of 13/year for 6 years

by year 3, u'r only hit with 35/4 or 8.75 mil instead of 13 mil for cap space!

[Teeareess]

one word answer. Agents. They will always want more. They'll want every cent you can give plus 10 or 12 &1/2 percent raises each year. Take your example of Kidd. New Jersey paid him a contract starting out at the highest amount they could give him under the cap. They couldn't offer more early to front load the contract because of the CBA and they couldn't lower the last few years of the deal because his agent would balk.

You can work out something with players with smaller deals, (isn't JT's contract front loaded? And if I remember correctly D. Fisher's contract with the Lakers didn't increase at all.) but for the big boys, the first year starts at MAX and goes up from there.

[cyman3]

ur MICHAEL REDD contract decreases annually LIKE CRAZY! from 25 to 5 million? i was thinking something like decreasing 1-2 million per year (just like it is in real life- increasing like 1-2 million per year). ur example has him averaging 13 million per year for 6 years. But wat about this?

18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8 (as the years go by)?

----------------------------------------------------

"good luck staying under the salary cap"

- well cant u say the same for the current system? i mean, look at SHAQs salary now. Miami will never be able to sign a player other than some mid-level exception type of players. Miami will never be under the cap with SHAQ there. and as the years go by, its only going to get harder to manage the cap space.

-----------------------------------------------------

as far as the AGENTS, why would they care? after all is said and done, they are gonna get X $$$$ (percentage of players salary) of money.

suppose u had a best friend who is very dependable/reliable. he borrowed $1000. he says he'll pay u back 200 first year, 300 second year, and 500 in the third year.

would u rather have that or- 500 first year, 300 second year, and 200 third year?

wat difference does it make? cuz after all is said and done, u'll end up with ur $1000 back.

if ANYTHING, u want the most money (500$$$) now. u know?

-------------------------------------------------------

the reason i say this is b/c of players like SHAQ and KIDD.

in the last year of his contract (3 years? i think), shaq will be making so much money- they wont be able to attract even guys at the MLE if they want to manage their cap space. now in 3 years, he may not be worth this whole capspace trouble. but in 2000, in his prime or so- he prob would be worth it (the trouble of managing cap space).

or take JASON KIDD. the dude wants to be traded but its hard right now for him to be traded. no one wants to invest in a guy whos only getting older, more injuries to come, and with a salary thats only increasing.

now, if it was decreasing- more teams would be willing to take the chance.

-----------------------------------------------

but then theres guys like AL HARRINGTON (constant salary every year, i think?). how on earth did he do that? even that, i think is a better way to manage cap space.

i donno, just my 2 cents