The NBA’s free-agency apocalypse isn’t here

Here are some things that happened in the early days of the 2024 NBA offseason:

• The nine-time All-Star left the Western Conference contenders for the Eastern Conference, where he will join the reigning MVP.
• One of the greatest shooters in history – a four-time NBA champion – joins the defending Western Conference champions to play alongside one of the game’s brightest young stars.
• A top-tier 3-and-D wing who has won titles with two different teams in the last five seasons joins one of the East’s most promising young rosters.

• An emerging Western Conference power, armed with two All-Stars but in desperate need of playmaking, acquired an All-Star point guard.
• The West’s most powerful young roster, coming off a 57-win season, fielded two accomplished veterans to boost their title chances.
• The East’s second-place finisher adds one of the league’s most versatile two-way wings.
• Oh, and the six teams collaborated on a spectacular swap of players and draft picks – the first trade of its kind in NBA history.
• All told, more than $2 billion in new contracts were handed out this past weekend, according to Jared Dubin, who writes about the league at Last Night in Basketball. More than 50 players have changed teams so far through free agency or trades.

Here’s another thing that happened in the early days of the 2024 offseason:

• The fans were moaning, the pundits were upset and the columnists kvetched Regarding a new salary cap feature – the dreaded second apron (gasp) – there are fears that it will choke the market, become a de facto hard cap, and make roster-building nearly impossible.

Friends, we may have set an NBA record for cognitive dissonance.

Look, it’s undeniable that the second apron — which severely penalizes teams that spend more than $188.9 million in salaries next season — has already had a profound impact. Without it, Paul George might still be a Clipper, Klay Thompson might still be a Warrior, and Kentavious Caldwell-Pope might still be a Nugget. (“Maybe” is the keyword here. Some of these divorces would have happened regardless of age, ego, and budgetary considerations.)

Teams that have just lost their stars or key role players have a right to be salty. But if we judge the NBA based on the fireworks each July, the league is still doing pretty well.

Paul George is now 76, giving Philadelphia a veteran All-Star to back up MVP Joel Embiid and rising star Tyrese Maxey. Four-time champion Klay Thompson is now a Maverick, giving Dallas an elite shooter to guard Luka Doncic and Kyrie Irving from the crowd. Two-time champion Kentavious Caldwell-Pope is now in Orlando, giving the Magic a steady scorer/defender to complement Paolo Banchero and Franz Wagner.

Dejounte Murray is now a Pelican, giving New Orleans the top-tier point guard it needs to get the best out of Zion Williamson and (for now) Brandon Ingram. DeMar DeRozan is now a king, giving Sacramento the veteran scorer it needs to complement De’Aaron Fox and Domantas Sabonis. Mikal Bridges is now a Knick, giving New York another strong two-way wing with Villanova roots. The Thunder picked up a defensive ace (Alex Caruso) and a rebounding maestro (Isaiah Hartenstein) to complement their young core. The Spurs signed a Hall of Fame-bound point guard (Chris Paul) to coach and mentor Victor Wembanyama.

These are no ordinary developments! And there’s still a lot of offseason left. There is still a possibility of a Lauri Markkanen trade. Or the Darius Garland trade. Or the Zach LaVine trade. Or an Ingram deal. The Nuggets still have time to bring back some talent. The Lakers still have time to do something.

It’s entirely possible that in future years, the second apron – which removes all forms of equipment for players to obtain – will have such a detrimental effect that GMs will storm the Olympic Tower and demand amendments to the collective bargaining agreement. Will demand. But don’t count on it.

Every major change to the NBA’s system over the past 40 years has generated some degree of irritation and apprehension and predictions of free-agency apocalypse. But the basic salary cap did not end the player movement of the 1980s, nor did it eliminate restricted free agency, the rookie scale. Now newbie scale, luxury tax, or Harsh luxury tax. There have been some tight markets and some loose markets along the way, but the system eventually finds balance, and the business of adding and subtracting players moves forward.

Today’s team executives are a flexible and creative group, supported by an army of knowledgeable capologists skilled at deciphering any new regulation that might be concocted by NBA lawyers. Witness the six-team trade mentioned above – a miracle of cap management that allowed all of those teams (Mavericks, Timberwolves, Warriors, Nuggets, Hornets and 76ers) to acquire the players they wanted while maximizing cap flexibility.

Lesson? Smart teams find a way. The Thunder have built a core of young, affordable talent over several years, and created enough cap space to add Caruso and Hartenstein this summer. The 76ers went old school, clearing the books of every player except Embiid and Maxey so they could spend money on George, luring him from the Clippers to a four-year, $212 million contract (and sending Philly to a post-2019 Made the first team to sign) a max free agent).

And of course, the Celtics won the championship last month by lining up stars like Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown with top-tier role players on manageable contracts — a formula that should withstand the new rules for now.

Will a second apron allow those teams — or for that matter, the Knicks, Timberwolves, Cavaliers and Pelicans — to keep their core together for the long term? Will every contender be forced to dismantle their roster after three or four years? Or can elite teams find a way to quickly retool by swapping out expensive players for cheaper (and perhaps less proven) alternatives? Are the dynasties already dead? These are all open questions.

But when GMs are faced with a new officiating wrinkle they’re a lot like the players: The first thing they do is complain. Then they adapt.

It’s true that the second apron is as close to a hard cap as the league has ever come – but in reality, it is not a true hard cap, nor a death knell. “It doesn’t have as much teeth as people have made it out to have,” said one longtime team executive. It just requires more foresight and financial gymnastics.

An important reminder: The second apron only affects the league’s biggest spenders – as a historical matter, a few teams per year. To put it another way: more than 20 teams per season would never have been affected by the new rules if they had existed in the past. Also worth noting: The NBA’s salary cap is projected to grow at a steady rate of 10 percent annually after the league signed its new national broadcast agreement, giving teams, even high spenders Will also give a lot of scope in future.

That doesn’t mean there hasn’t been any real suffering, or legitimate crying.

It’s legitimately painful to see the Warriors part ways with Thompson, after all he has to do with that franchise. It’s unfortunate that the Clippers and George couldn’t find a way to move forward, despite the team investing heavily in acquiring him five years ago. And it’s sad to see the Nuggets, just a year away from a championship, lose another key part of their title team due to cap concerns. Nikola Jokic is running out of dudes to catch all those amazing passes.

The second apron could still force the Timberwolves to move Karl-Anthony Towns. This is making it difficult for the Bucks to strengthen their rotation around Giannis Antetokounmpo. Or anything the Suns could do to help Kevin Durant and Devin Booker.

But, well, it’s a matter of practice. The NBA is leaning stronger than ever toward a system that promotes equality and forces teams—especially the biggest-spending teams—to make tough choices. Your view of that philosophy may vary depending on the loyalty of your team, the size of your home market, or your view of modern labor dynamics.

In another era, the Warriors and Clippers would have continued to spend into oblivion to retain their stars and add role players — luxury taxes be damned. That’s great for Warriors and Clippers fans, but perhaps not so much for fans in Memphis or Salt Lake City, where revenues haven’t been strong enough to support deficit spending for years.

Yes, the Warriors lost a franchise legend and maybe a little shine after nearly a decade of dominance. But it made the Mavericks and Spurs a little stronger. The Clippers’ loss was the Sixers’ gain. There are now several teams in the much-maligned Eastern Conference chasing the Celtics. This is objectively good for business. And it’s a vivid expression of the (somewhat Orwellian) phrase coined by the late Commissioner David Stern a decade ago when describing the goals of an earlier labor deal: “player sharing.”

So, yes, we may see talent becoming more evenly distributed in the coming years. We may see a further extension of the wild parity of the last six years. We may not see another dynasty in the near future. Is that a good thing? Bad talk? just the one? Again, this may depend on your personal values ​​as a fan.

I’ll leave the last word here to a man far more experienced and intelligent in these matters, a man who presided over one of the world’s most successful and glamorous franchises and was also renowned for his poker skills.

“What they’re trying to do is say, ‘Let’s all have the same number of chips and we’ll see who can build the best team.'” It was former Lakers owner Jerry Buss, in 2000, the N.B.A. Luxury tax implemented after first performance. Buss said, “I like the concept of having an equal number of weapons, and just seeing who can run the ship best.” “That’s the competition.”