The New CBA, the Lakers New Golden Knight in Shining Armor

When this current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) was signed a few years back, it was clear to me that the Lakers were not going to be contenders for a while. I didn't think that it was going to be this bad, but I knew harsh days were headed our way. Everything in that CBA was tailored so that the Lakers would be at a disadvantage. Every move we had made historically was now outlawed in the current CBA.

Being over the luxury cap was no longer a nuisance, but it became punitive. The thought process under introducing a punitive salary cap was that money spent would be a form of "revenue sharing." But lets face it, this was a clear attempt at making it so that the Lakers couldn't splash their big market money around in free agency all the time. No well run business would voluntarily bleed money for the sake of the "greater good." Beyond this financial hand-cuffing, the biggest tool in absorbing key free agents into the golden armor was the sign and trade tactic Mitch used so masterfully. Sign and trades were no longer available to salary cap "offenders." Furthermore, poaching rising stars was no longer as easy as new team contracts with players for max contracts would be signed with one year less than what the original team may offer.

But I have news for you Laker Haters... This will all change very soon. Like any good business, someone with intelligence figures out how to make it work under the current system. And guess what... we still have Mitch Kupchak. Even though we have had to endure 3 god awful years, we did silently build a good future. We have Julius Randall, Jordan Clarkson, a top 5 pick in this years draft, and hopefully Ed Davis. This is a talented core that we can add pieces to, and be back into contention. Even more inciting is the fact that they will be on this squad for the cheapest salaries ever. And that's not even counting the fact that the new CBA will be back in the Laker's favor.

In 2017 there will be a new CBA. This CBA will be more player friendly. Meaning less punitive restrictions on players looking to relocate, less luxury tax offender mandates, and more importantly... an even higher Basketball Related Income (BRI) for the players. A higher BRI means a higher salary cap. A higher salary cap means more money that can be spent by big market teams. And lets face it, smaller market teams will have a harder time keeping up as the ceiling for these teams was pretty much the foundation of the current CBA.

So all in all, even though we might only end up with 22 wins this season (hopefully still less than the magic), we are set up for winning in the long haul fellow LTBers. It is only a matter of time until we get to tear down Hill, Lin, and Boozer from the banner and replace them with 60 win players.

What makes you think or where has it been said that the next CBA will be more player friendly? A higher salary cap means all teams can spend more not just the big market teams.

The reason a higher cap will help big market teams is because the cap was set to help make smaller market teams more competitive. The cap was introduced at a level that would make the smaller teams profitable. When the new CBA is introduced, this cap will be raised markedly. Even with the new TV deal, it will be difficult for the smaller market teams to payout big salaries to multiple players, so even though they will be allowed to spend the same amount of money as the Lakers, they will not be able to do it financially. Think about it this way. For many years, there was a soft cap. The only teams to repeatedly go over this soft cap and still operate at a profit were the big market teams. In essence, raising the cap will benefit the big market teams because they will be the ones that can financially pay out. And since there is no true revenue sharing program in the NBA, the changes in the new CBA will make this an advantage to the Lakers. The question shouldn't be whether a higher cap will help big market teams, but rather why would the new CBA incorporate a more player friendly stance. The answer to this question lies in the climate of the negotiations. In 2010 when this current CBA was being negotiated, America was undergoing the strongest recession since the great depression. This was so strong a recession, some pundits were even mathematically proving it to be a depression. Under these conditions, the players could not publicly complain that having a job that was paying a great share to them was not enough. So they decided, like many other Americans at the time, to take work while it was available and to renegotiate for a fairer deal....

This last CBA implemented very harsh penalties that restrict certain moves teams can make when over the cap. That still won't change. A lot of these small market teams didn't want to have to pay the luxury tax due to going over the salary cap. Essentially they would have to write a check out to the league. With the cap raised, well they won't have to worry about it. I just don't understand how a blanket raising of the cap helps the Lakers? Small market teams will still be able to match what the Lakers can offer and not worry about going over the cap and being hit over the head with stiff penalties.

The advantage that the Lakers had back then was they could make bad moves, offer bad contracts and still contend because they made more money due to their location. Mitch Kupchak has benefited from being in a big market because he's been able to recover from his many mistakes and lack of a decent plan. Those days will still be gone in 2016 because the Lakers can write a check to the league for being over the cap which will increase more for each year they're over the cap and it will prohibit them from making certain moves while over the cap.

This new CBA negotiation will be a doozy. There is a lot of extra money to be accounted for and a lot of these players will be highly paid before the negotiation takes place, owners won't be happy and players won't be happy and I expect another lockout. I really hope they're trying to get things ironed out now because come 2017 it could be brutal and it may not be the player-friendly cap that you're hoping for.

I have no knowledge in what you guys are talking about, can someone please explain it to me? Like you explain it to a 8 yr old....Thanks

i wouldn't say the last CBa is what doomed the lakers. it was david stern's veto of the CP3 trade that began the demise of the lakers. there is no way in hell the heat would have beat a CP3, kobe and dwight combo. i know the team was owned by all the owners at the time, blah blah blah. ********. stern knew kobe was coming for number 6, 7, 8 and his new golden boy (lebron) would be stuck with a goose egg in the title department.

however, i do agree with allen. bright days are certainly ahead in the near future!

hopefully a big man in the draft. sign a pf and trade for durant at the deadline.

The CBA restructured the hierarchy of the NBA which is why the Lakers and the Knicks and the Celtics all suck this year. It's part of a larger strategy to create an international presence where the NBA champs might take on the Euro and Asian champs for example so it truly is a 'World Championship'.. Come 2017, there will be more money but it's available across the board so it's like a millionaire hitting the lottery. Only so much furniture can fit into one's living room! Player friendly means that players will get higher salaries than they do now and so will the owners. I doubt it's more complicated than that....

I don't think you understand how the cap works. They are 3 levels of the cap, a minimum salary cap, all teams have to meet this although the penalty for not doing so is trivial. This is to make sure the players get paid. There is the upper salary cap to restrict teams from being the Yankee's of the NBA. Then their is the Luxury tax, to enable well built teams to keep their best players but at a price.

If the salary cap goes up, so do player salaries. If the salary cap is $66 million or $166 million a max player will still get paid the same percentage. If a player has played 10+ seasons its 35% of the cap. (roughly) So by raising the cap your only raising player salaries. The only exception to this is when the salary cap initially increases as teams will have a 1 time opportunity to fill up their cap.