Wednesday, May 11th, 2011 at 1:00 pm  |  21 responses

Report: NBA Proposing ‘Franchise Tag’ to Players Union

The latest proposal from David Stern’s team to Billy Hunter’s is a modified version of the NFL’s “Franchise Tag” (and the abolishment of fully guaranteed contracts.) SI reports: “The tag, however, would be very different from the NFL’s version, which allows a team to essentially block one of its free agents from entering the market by binding him to his incumbent team with a one-year contract that carries a high salary based on various parameters. The system the league has presented would not work this way, according to sources. Instead, a team would be allowed to designate one player for preferential contractual treatment, including more overall money, more guaranteed money and at least one extra year on his contract. A player would have to agree to such a designation. It is designed to work as an incentive to get a player to remain with his team rather than as a roadblock to free agency, the sources said. Take the situation between the Cavaliers and LeBron James one year ago. Under the league’s proposal, the Cavaliers would not have been able to unilaterally ‘tag’ James a franchise player and bind him to the team for one more season. The Cavaliers would have been able to offer James various enticements he may not have been able to get from other teams, the sources said. The NBA’s current collective bargaining agreement already gives incumbent teams such advantages when it comes to re-signing their own players. James and Chris Bosh both took less money to sign with the Heat than they could have received from the Cavs and Raptors, respectively. The idea behind the league’s new proposal would be to increase the gap between what teams can offer a ‘designated player’ and what non-designated players can get on the open market … Sources also said the league’s proposal would ban fully guaranteed contracts. All contracts would have limits on the amount of money a player would be guaranteed to receive, and those guarantees would decline during the life of each contract. In other words, a player making, say, $5 million per season over four years would actually be guaranteed less than $5 million in each of those four seasons — and the amount guaranteed would drop each season. The idea is for teams to be able to get out of undesirable contacts more easily and avoid ugly, Eddy Curry-style buyout talks.”

  • Add a Comment
  • Share
  • RSS

Tags: , , , , ,

  • JTaylor21

    It wouldn’t matter either way because nowadays players are more interested in competing for a chip than they are in making even more money.

  • bull22

    has to be just like the nfl for this to work, fans from cleveland and toronto did not deserve to get punked by these arrogant players the way they did….. so no this band-aid wont’t work….

  • robb

    @JTaylor21 I think so, they win tons of money in sponsorship deals anyway and if they win a chip they’ll get even more sponsorships, so I don’t see how teams can incentivize a player that wants out.

  • Kas

    Sure, JTaylor…

  • http://hoopistani.blogspot.com hoopistani

    if it works, i wonder who miami will tag – wade or lebron?

  • http://twitter.com/BeezKneezy LA Huey

    I like minimizing the amount that can be guaranteed. And I’m sure Hawks fans do as well.

  • SpursFan

    I proposed this.

  • http://Thundercats.com ThunderCats

    Thunder don’t have to worry about stuff like this since their star signs extensions out of the bright lights and for what he feels is a fair price. Wayyy less then what other teams would offer them.

  • shuref00t

    The notion of non-guaranteed contracts has Eddy Curry, Gilbert Arenas, and Rashard Lewis all thinking “sucks not to be us!”

  • Paps

    A least their talking about it. I’m not looking forward to watching just NY, Miami, LA and OKC in the finals every year for the next ten.

  • TheBarberShop

    Nope. I don’t like it. Not one bit. No sir.

  • Brothaman

    ^^^^ So I’m guessing you didn’t enjoy seeing only 8 teams win the past 30 or so Finals. Everyone wants to defend parity in the League, but let’s stop acting like we actually have it

  • Brothaman

    that was for Paps’ comment

  • Ali

    Theyre doing this in soccer too, where homegrown players are persuaded to stay with their first team (if it is a small club) rather than be scooped up by a giant club.

  • add

    dam it why does everybody gotta be so greedy

  • http://www.triplejunearthed.com/dacre Dacre

    Eddy-Curry style contracts have more to do with GM/team owners than Eddy-Curry style players….

  • http://www.triplejunearthed.com/dacre Dacre

    @ add – You gotta feed the family brah.

  • http://wwww.need4sheed.com Tarzan Cooper

    eddy currys fast food litter covered floorboard………………………………

  • http://www.yamahyouth.com Germs

    One way ore another; Eddy Curry is mentioned in articles a lot!

  • http://www.yamahyouth.com Germs

    ore = or……

  • http://slamonline.com cold as ice

    everybody gets mad and degrades the bron’s,bosh’and melo’s for how they left there respected teams that drafted them.though bron is the leader of the pack for scrunityi dont feel its wrong for a player to decide his future. gm’s,owners do it all the time. they have 99% of control over a players destination.when the well’s all dry and used up they trade,waive,or buy u out.and they already have somebody lined up for ur position.through the draft or trade. but when a player decides to take his talents someplace else whether to south beach or the bright lights and decide his future before the next man will. (ex. k.perkins,s.oneil of la,a.i,,c.billups)it at that point becomes an issue. c’mon owners/gm’s ya been contollin players destinies since the beginnings of sport. now playersgrow a pair an there upset??? well yea when u see how much revenue ur about to lose until the next knight in shining armor arrives. now they wanna block the loop holes. smh.my my ya dont like how the shoe fits on the opposite foot now do ya???? i support the players decessions.