Hoops

Salary cap rules

Thanks, KR. Do you have a link to the article you read?

Does anyone know how I can contact the NBL's head office for a quote?

Paying the bottom 5 benchies effectively $400k is dumb.
Chumps on the bench, training bait will earn twice what they got previously.

I read an article a while ago explaining the whole thing, which said the number that counted against the cap would be either the value assessed by the league, or the amount actually earned, whichever is higher.

Which makes sense. You can't get around the cap by underpaying players (or paying them under the table), but you also can't overspend on guys to lure them away from teams with less money available.

I believe Will is correct. The $$ value given by the league replaces the points value given by the league in seasons past.

koberulez actually you are incorrect.Will is correct. It is how it works. I know a number of players that exact scenario exists for.

What about COWARDS who hide in anonymity hey?

God I hate people who talk about themselves in the third person

The Mock would LOVE a geek at what salaries these boys are making, but wheree is this information to be found?

That's incorrect, will. The higher of the two numbers is what counts against the cap.

Yes but seeing the NBA has nothing to do with it, the NBL can't and will never be able to enforce that cap. That was the whole point of the Points Cap.

the NBL has a base salary that they give each player. the base salaries of a club mustnt exceed the cap.So for example Bairstow could be deemed to be a 200K player.In that case only the amount that the NBL deems(200k) counts against the cap. In reality the club can pay That player way more. So some teams have players that count 150-200K against the cap but are actaully getting paid double that.

Its kinda like the old point system. As long as the NBA deemed value of a player fits inside the cap then what they actually get paid can be different. There are some guys on 2-3 times there deemed value.

Kestleman owns 2 teams now of course.

Freethrows - I wouldn't say 'farce', more a smokescreen to get more imports into the league and bring back some high-profile Australians from overseas. That worked.

I don;t know if Kestleman cares about parity. I think he just wants a product he can sell to the public and so to the media and so make some money. If the makes lots of money, all teams and owners get to share the spoils. A side effect might be parity of opportunity for success.

So far, things are going well. Pre-season interest was high and positive, crowds are big and the games themselves have been terrific. Kestleman may be right. It'd be nice if he is.

"Sydney 3 rounds in and still without a full roster"


Yet how many try & bitch about our salary?? lmao....

The bottom 5 players earning $400,000 between is the stupidest idea ever invented.

Sydney 3 rounds in and still without a full roster

PeterJohn, you're correct in the assumption that it's the bottom five players that count toward 400K max of a team's salary cap. The NBL actually wrote it "any five players", as I did in my previous post. It was very badly worded and organised. It was also not clear whether it was actual or deemed market value that would be used.

I remember being bemused by the lack of clarity at the time, and I now think the whole thing is a farce and won't be acted upon at all. I don't think Kestelman has any desire for parity in the league.

Freethrows - #3 in your list is not quite right. There must be 5 players whose combined salaries must not exceed $400,000. i.e., the lowest paid 5 players can't get more than $400,000, collectively.

Also, it was never clear if it was the actual salaries that would be used to police all of these rules, or the deemed market values of each player, as determined by some committee NBL was going to convene. IIRC, it was those market values that were going to be published, not the actual salaries.

Nonetheless, your point stands. AFAIK, there's been neither announcements nor press releases to suggest the committee ever was convened nor publicatino of players' market values, as promised.

For those interested, you can probably find the original press release on the new rules in the NBL news archive. It was released on 30 March 2016.

The same people that did last time.

In reference to the $400,000 that is in regard to it being spent amongst the bottom 5 players AFAIK.

There was a system in place last year for distribution of over the cap money due to the marquee rule. Any clubs spending under the cap got a percentage. They might be using the same system, don't know.

If Melbourne are paying Odigie ($40), Williams ($80K), Majok ($85K), Tomlinson ($90K) and Barlow ($100K) as an example they would fit the $400K rule. Just guesses but not unreasonable.

Was amazed to check the box scores today and see Rondo had 24 assists! Thats over 50 points (given some would be 3 point shots) coming off Rondo's passing! Seems a lot of the point guards have been putting up huge assist numbers to start the season, are they becoming less selfish/better floor generals? Or are the statisticians more generous with their interpretation of an 'assist' this NBA season?