NFL vs NBA - a quick poll

[Admin]

I just wanted to get some feedback to see which people here prefer, the way that the NBA does things or the way that the NFL does things.

[HawkItus]

number 2 is backwards. NFL has non-guaranteed. NBA is guaranteed.

[Admin]

number 2 is backwards. NFL has non-guaranteed. NBA is guaranteed.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Please take off the Commissioner Gordon option.

Make people choose between Satan ( Goddell ) and the Devil ( Stern ).

[Admin]

Please take off the Commissioner Gordon option.

Make people choose between Satan ( Goddell ) and the Devil ( Stern ).

No sense of humor I tell ya!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

My choices:

- Free agency after the draft ( NBA ): The NBA Draft takes place about a week after the NBA Finals are over, thus, there is very little down time between the end of the season and the Draft. In the NFL, however, the Draft takes place almost a full 3 months after the Super Bowl. So I understand why the NFL has their free agency period before the draft. The NBA's system is fine.

- Non-guaranteed contracts ( NFL ): With the amount of busts and guys who play may dramatically fall off from year to year, the NFL's system of non-guaranteed contracts would be the way to go for most NBA teams. But I don't know if it would help change things a lot, from a balance of power standpoint. Take Dwight Howard for example. The current system benefits us right now, because we have the cap space to offer him a significant deal ( although still not more than the Lakers ). But under the NFL system of non-guaranteed contracts, the Lakers could use their wealth to give Dwight a lot more money upfront, than we could.

I could see the Hawks offering Dwight a 4 year - 65 million deal . . with a 20 million signing bonus . . with 40 million guaranteed. That would essentially be a 4 year - 85 million deal for Dwight.

On the other hand, I could see the Lakers offering Dwight a 5 year - 70 million deal from the Lakers . . with a 40 million signing bonus . . and 50 million guaranteed. This would be a 5 year - 105 million deal for Dwight.

Even if the Hawks guaranteed all of the money, the power play the Lakers could do would really make Dwight think twice about coming to ATL.

- Draft Lottery ( NBA ): I actually like the fact that the worst team in the league isn't guaranteed the #1 pick. But they can make the Draft Lottery process better. I'd prefer a Draft Tournament involving the remaining 14 teams. The winner of the tourney gets the #1 pick, the runner-up gets the #2 pick, and you slot the rest by record. But if they wanted to keep the current lottery process, they could tweak it more to make it more transparent, or even jazz it up a little.

- David Stern ( NBA ): As much as I don't care for the dude, most of the things he's done for the league have been good. Players and owners may dislike his condescending tone and actions on things, but I don't think many players flat out hate the dude. Can't say the same about Goddell. Players have a hatred for that dude, and fans don't really care for him either. The things he's doing and implementing isn't in the best interest of fans or the players. He's operating in the best interest of owners by lining their pockets with even more money.

The fact that this dude wants to add 2 more games to the regular season, or add 2 more teams to the playoffs, instead of simply reducing the pre-season, shows just how much he cares about the players. He's all for "safety", but not if it means that owners and the league lose a week's worth of revenue.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

No sense of humor I tell ya!

No, I get what you did. It's just that people may choose to pick that option because both commissioners are disliked. You'd get a better feel of how people thought, if they had to choose between Goddell and Stern. That's like picking between Rosie O'Donnell and Whoppi Goldberg, as to which one you'd marry, if you were forced to marry one of them.

[Bahamut]

I'll take Goodell, even with the rule changes, over Stern and his crooked officials. At least the NFL has parity!

[Guest]

NBA does not have guaranteed contracts, they have plenty of non-guaranteed ones. The owners are at fault if you complain about them being guaranteed because they give those out.

I do not know enough about the NFL and how their contracts work. I am almost certain they do not have some blanket "no contract is guaranteed" clause, it is likely business practice that dictates most contracts are non-guaranteed. I get the sense that it is the labor market and owners that are pushing towards non-guaranteed in the NFL and guaranteed in the NBA. Since that is the case, you can't really change much there.

As for the other stuff, I like that the NFL has free agency before the draft as a way to give a team more flexibility with their picks. I do not like the lottery as it is constructed, but I prefer that to the NFL snake draft.

[Admin]

NBA does not have guaranteed contracts, they have plenty of non-guaranteed ones. The owners are at fault if you complain about them being guaranteed because they give those out.

I do not know enough about the NFL and how their contracts work. I am almost certain they do not have some blanket "no contract is guaranteed" clause, it is likely business practice that dictates most contracts are non-guaranteed. I get the sense that it is the labor market and owners that are pushing towards non-guaranteed in the NFL and guaranteed in the NBA. Since that is the case, you can't really change much there.

As for the other stuff, I like that the NFL has free agency before the draft as a way to give a team more flexibility with their picks. I do not like the lottery as it is constructed, but I prefer that to the NFL snake draft.

This is more talk along the lines of "the Hawks might have salary cap space this year" which we all know the Hawks will and we all know the NBA contracts are guaranteed. It doesn't matter whether that comes from the league office, the owners, the CBA, the janitors or anyone. The bottom line is still the same when it comes to us fans.

Personally I like guaranteed contracts as it creates accountability and forces teams who make mistakes to either live with them or have to give up valuable assets to get out of those mistakes early. Sure I'd love for my team to not have to endure every year of an Alan Henderson / Chris Crawford type of contract but I don't mind that when all teams are held to the same type of standard.

As to free agency I much prefer having it before hand so that you can have a firm strategy in the draft of how to handle your picks. I think teams might get stuck with holes or duplications on their roster due to having the draft before free agency like this. The Hawks could draft a center or two in the draft this year thinking they have no real shot at Dwight and then free agency opens and Dwight is knocking on our door to sign along with CP3 and now we've got a logjam at a position. Not that it's a bad thing, but we could have used those picks to round out the roster a lot better.

[Admin]

My choices: - Free agency after the draft ( NBA ): The NBA Draft takes place about a week after the NBA Finals are over, thus, there is very little down time between the end of the season and the Draft. In the NFL, however, the Draft takes place almost a full 3 months after the Super Bowl. So I understand why the NFL has their free agency period before the draft. The NBA's system is fine.

I prefer in the NFL where teams have months to really scout and evaluate players coming into the league. I've heard the draft will be pushed even farther, into May next year. As a fan I hate that it takes so long because I want it now, but at the end of the day I want my franchise to make the best decision possible. Having free agency before allows me to use my salary cap space and build the roster the way that I want it with players who are known quantities and then I can draft for potential with the unknown quantities.

- Non-guaranteed contracts ( NFL ): With the amount of busts and guys who play may dramatically fall off from year to year, the NFL's system of non-guaranteed contracts would be the way to go for most NBA teams. But I don't know if it would help change things a lot, from a balance of power standpoint. Take Dwight Howard for example. The current system benefits us right now, because we have the cap space to offer him a significant deal ( although still not more than the Lakers ). But under the NFL system of non-guaranteed contracts, the Lakers could use their wealth to give Dwight a lot more money upfront, than we could. I could see the Hawks offering Dwight a 4 year - 65 million deal . . with a 20 million signing bonus . . with 40 million guaranteed. That would essentially be a 4 year - 85 million deal for Dwight. On the other hand, I could see the Lakers offering Dwight a 5 year - 70 million deal from the Lakers . . with a 40 million signing bonus . . and 50 million guaranteed. This would be a 5 year - 105 million deal for Dwight. Even if the Hawks guaranteed all of the money, the power play the Lakers could do would really make Dwight think twice about coming to ATL.

It's nice that NFL teams can so easily get out of contracts and it seems that in a matter of two years tops you can take a team who's in cap hell and have them with a boatload of money to spend. Then if they don't like the guys that they signed they can always cut them after a couple of years. This would be fine and dandy in the NBA except for teams in small markets where they'd really struggle to compete against the Lakers and Knicks of the world.

- Draft Lottery ( NBA ): I actually like the fact that the worst team in the league isn't guaranteed the #1 pick. But they can make the Draft Lottery process better. I'd prefer a Draft Tournament involving the remaining 14 teams. The winner of the tourney gets the #1 pick, the runner-up gets the #2 pick, and you slot the rest by record. But if they wanted to keep the current lottery process, they could tweak it more to make it more transparent, or even jazz it up a little.

You know how I feel about what I consider to be a terrible draft tournament idea because you're 2 final teams would probably end up being Dallas and Utah and neither of them need the #1 pick nearly as badly as the Charlotte's, Cleveland's, Orlando's, etc. I mean just think about the Mavs winning that tournament and then adding Noel to their front court and having enough money to sign some very good players and next year the Mavs would be a stud team. While the truly bad teams would have to slide back.

If you really wanted to do a tournament like this you'd have to break it down into groups of 4 picks and let them play each other by record. The worst 4 teams would play each other in a double elimination round robin and the winner would get the best pick and so on and so forth. Then you do that for 5-8 and 9-12 and the remaining non-playoff teams would pick where they finished. That seems like the only really fair way to do it that won't reward a team who barely misses the playoffs and gets to go into a tournament and fatten up their roster by beating up on inferior teams and getting the top overall pick.

- David Stern ( NBA ): As much as I don't care for the dude, most of the things he's done for the league have been good. Players and owners may dislike his condescending tone and actions on things, but I don't think many players flat out hate the dude. Can't say the same about Goddell. Players have a hatred for that dude, and fans don't really care for him either. The things he's doing and implementing isn't in the best interest of fans or the players. He's operating in the best interest of owners by lining their pockets with even more money. The fact that this dude wants to add 2 more games to the regular season, or add 2 more teams to the playoffs, instead of simply reducing the pre-season, shows just how much he cares about the players. He's all for "safety", but not if it means that owners and the league lose a week's worth of revenue.

I actually like Goddell over Stern because I don't trust Stern in any way shape or form. I'm 99% sure that he's hand picked teams to get into the finals and win over the past 20 years on many occasions and that's just not forgivable in my book. I think back to those very good Kings and Suns teams who were utterly screwed over in the playoffs going up against the Laker and Spur darlings of the league and they really had no shot at actually beating them because of Stern. Goddell certainly has his flaws and he's changing the game in ways that a lot of people don't like, but at least he's not deciding the outcome of games and at worst he can be accused of trying to make the game safer.

[Guest]

This is more talk along the lines of "the Hawks might have salary cap space this year" which we all know the Hawks will and we all know the NBA contracts are guaranteed. It doesn't matter whether that comes from the league office, the owners, the CBA, the janitors or anyone. The bottom line is still the same when it comes to us fans.

I do not think that is the case. Deshawn has a non-guaranteed contract, so did Korver, so does Andre Miller and Scott and Mack. I could go on about others but the point is clear that the NBA does not mandate guaranteed contracts. It is the economics behind the NBA that has leveraged guaranteed contracts to be normal business practice.

So to say you like "guaranteed like the NBA" or "nonguaranteed like the NFL", I believe you are really getting at the NBA having players that are extremely hard to replace while the NFL has easily replaceable players. How exactly can you change these things?

When you look at the contracts with the largest amount of guaranteed money in the NFL, these are for players who are not easily replaceable (quarterbacks mainly). I just do not think you can snap your fingers and dictate guaranteed or non-guaranteed.

Now with timing of the draft and deciding on the order, those are things that you can actually change.

[benhillboy]

I'm not so concerned about any topic except the commissioners. Stern is very unlikeable and I question how much basketball he knows, but my dislike for him pales in comparison to my disdain for Roger Goodell. I despise that man, all that he stands for, and every yellow-backed minion in his office allowing him to destroy the game under the ridiculous guise of "player safety."

[Admin]

I do not think that is the case. Deshawn has a non-guaranteed contract, so did Korver, so does Andre Miller and Scott and Mack. I could go on about others but the point is clear that the NBA does not mandate guaranteed contracts. It is the economics behind the NBA that has leveraged guaranteed contracts to be normal business practice.

So to say you like "guaranteed like the NBA" or "nonguaranteed like the NFL", I believe you are really getting at the NBA having players that are extremely hard to replace while the NFL has easily replaceable players. How exactly can you change these things?

When you look at the contracts with the largest amount of guaranteed money in the NFL, these are for players who are not easily replaceable (quarterbacks mainly). I just do not think you can snap your fingers and dictate guaranteed or non-guaranteed.

Now with timing of the draft and deciding on the order, those are things that you can actually change.

I guess we could clarify this that not 100% of contracts are guaranteed, but all of the big contracts that we actually care about and that actually can make or break a team are guaranteed. Wouldn't you agree with that?

But the big thing in the NFL is that even if you have a guaranteed contract you can still cut a guy and then spread his up front money throughout a couple-few years (not sure exactly how this works) and help reduce the burden on the cap. But in the NBA you can't do that. Personally I prefer the NBA way where you make your bed and you lay in it, but I can see why some would prefer the NFL way of being able to easily get out of contract mistakes.

[Admin]

I'm not so concerned about any topic except the commissioners. Stern is very unlikeable and I question how much basketball he knows, but my dislike for him pales in comparison to my disdain for Roger Goodell. I despise that man, all that he stands for, and every yellow-backed minion in his office allowing him to destroy the game under the ridiculous guise of "player safety."

It may be a guise but at the end of the day the game has become safer, equipment is far better since he took over, and hopefully we'll have less and less of these issues where retired players have brain problems. Even if the only thing that Goodell did was to change the rule of playing after concussions I'd say he's done more for the sport than Stern has for basketball, but Goodell has done a lot more than that. I don't think he's beyond questioning as there are a lot of shady stuff going on, but at the end of the day the game is safter for players in one way or another.

[AHF]

My $.02:

[*]For the NBA, I like the draft before FA because for most lottery teams the identity of your team next year will depend more on who you land in the draft than on who you land in FA. In the NFL, individual players drafted make a much, much smaller impact on team identity and direction and the draft is largely used to fill holes that aren't filled after FA. The NBA draft lottery is more of a hunt for your future star than in the NFL so I think the timing of the draft is better for the NBA as is. (I also think the NFL draft timing is better for that league). [*]Guaranteed versus non-guaranteed contracts - This i more about leverage and business practice than about rules. The NFL could fully guarantee every contract and the NBA could run with no guaranteed contracts. However, the NBA is (again) more of a star league so that you can't count on the draft or FA to fill major holes while in the NFL you frequently can. Since the NBA players are less replaceable, they end up with the leverage to negotiate non-guaranteed contracts. The only way to shift this dynamic in either league (short of collusion) is to change the rules to mandate guaranteed versus non-guaranteed contracts. As a fan, I enjoy the greater flexibility the NFL gives my favorite teams in shedding mistakes (think Eddy Curry), renegotiating contracts, and generally rebooting the team. This is not a dynamic I would expect to change absent a negotiated CBA change where the NBAPA signs off on max contracts of 5 years but makes only the first 3 years guaranteed or gives teams right to terminate the agreement at a penalty even if guaranteed, etc. [*]Lottery versus fixed - This is another area where the differences in the leagues shows up. The NFL season is short and the impact of star players is much less (thus reducing the opportunity and incentive to tank). The NBA season is much longer (forcing fans to sit through say 45 games of tanking instead of 8) and the need for a star is much greater (making the incentive to tank higher). I would not like to watch the race to the bottom in the NBA get even worse by removing the lottery process. Conversely, tanking is more rare in the NFL so the need for a lottery system isn't as apparent to me. Tweaks to the NBA lottery are things I would talk about, but I wouldn't consider the NFL system for the NBA. [*]Stern needs to be gone a few years ago at this point but he has done great things for the NBA over his entire tenure. I don't buy into the conspiracy theories about him mandating that the Lakers make the finals (although I do absolutely buy into refs favoring stars) but if those turn out to bear fruit then I will change my vote on this one. Goodell seems to have stepped into a great position and has stubbed his toes a few times already. I am for Stern's tenure over the limited results from Goodell.

[Guest]

I guess we could clarify this that not 100% of contracts are guaranteed, but all of the big contracts that we actually care about and that actually can make or break a team are guaranteed. Wouldn't you agree with that?

But the big thing in the NFL is that even if you have a guaranteed contract you can still cut a guy and then spread his up front money throughout a couple-few years (not sure exactly how this works) and help reduce the burden on the cap. But in the NBA you can't do that. Personally I prefer the NBA way where you make your bed and you lay in it, but I can see why some would prefer the NFL way of being able to easily get out of contract mistakes.

I would agree with that, although it seems like the NFL contracts that make or break a team are also largely guaranteed.

Like I said before, I do not know enough about the NFL CBA so I do not know how their salary cap functions. But as far as being able to spread money throughout the life of a contract, or cut a player and move around their caphits to future years, that is in the new NBA CBA. The Stretch Provision covers cutting a player and spreading their caphit across future years at a lessened degree and you can always offer a signing bonus that is 15% of the total value of a contract upfront.

It sounds like the NFL may be more flexible with individual contracts than the NBA. So if it boils down to the NFL not having an individual salary cap for a player and being able to have an unrestricted percentage of the total value of a contract as a signing bonus, then I take the NFL's system all day every day in regards to this. Constraints are almost always welfare diminishing.

[Admin]

I would agree with that, although it seems like the NFL contracts that make or break a team are also largely guaranteed.

Like I said before, I do not know enough about the NFL CBA so I do not know how their salary cap functions. But as far as being able to spread money throughout the life of a contract, or cut a player and move around their caphits to future years, that is in the new NBA CBA. The Stretch Provision covers cutting a player and spreading their caphit across future years at a lessened degree and you can always offer a signing bonus that is 15% of the total value of a contract upfront.

It sounds like the NFL may be more flexible with individual contracts than the NBA. So if it boils down to the NFL not having an individual salary cap for a player and being able to have an unrestricted percentage of the total value of a contract as a signing bonus, then I take the NFL's system all day every day in regards to this. Constraints are almost always welfare diminishing.

Sorry what I mean is that if you cut a player in the NFL and that player had a signing bonus of say $20 million on a 4 year contract you can cut that player and then spread his signing bonus out over a 2-3 year period after he's been cut so that you don't take such a huge hit immediately. Obviously I don't know the exact details of how this all works, but that's the general idea behind it. If you could do that in the NBA then you might be able to drop some of these bad contracts earlier and spread out their cap penalty over a few years so that it doesn't impact you right away.

AHF made some good points above about the differences, even if I don't agree entirely with them, and I'm sure he can explain the differences between the 2 systems a lot better than I can.

[Guest]

Sorry what I mean is that if you cut a player in the NFL and that player had a signing bonus of say $20 million on a 4 year contract you can cut that player and then spread his signing bonus out over a 2-3 year period after he's been cut so that you don't take such a huge hit immediately. Obviously I don't know the exact details of how this all works, but that's the general idea behind it. If you could do that in the NBA then you might be able to drop some of these bad contracts earlier and spread out their cap penalty over a few years so that it doesn't impact you right away.

AHF made some good points above about the differences, even if I don't agree entirely with them, and I'm sure he can explain the differences between the 2 systems a lot better than I can.

You can do that in the NBA, but we haven't seen it yet. I guess we saw it twice with the Amensty clauses, but in the life of this CBA, teams will be able to use the Stretch Provision. A nutshell description is that you will be able to waive a player and count his remaining salary equally across two times the number of years on his contract plus one. So not exactly the same, the Stretch appears to be more restrictive.

And looks like AHF said about the same things I have already mentioned, but in a different vocabulary and in one consolidated post. I think it is strange he likes the NFL version because in the past he has argued against that type of model in relation to the NBA's model. Either this has some subtle difference that I do not see at this time or he has changed his stance.

[AHF]

The biggest difference is still the guaranteed versus non-guaranteed practice in both leagues. If an NFL player's contract was fully guaranteed, then you would have the same issues as in the NBA with cutting him. The real issue for the NFL is how to handle the signing bonus and any fully guaranteed portion of the contract but since there is so much more emphasis on the signing bonus (guaranteed) in the NFL there are different rules for how you deal with the money that is already paid out to the player when you cut them before a long-term deal is done. You generally aren't talking about future guaranteed money in those situations like you typically have in the NBA with someone like Amare Stoudamire.