But all things are relative.

Between 2007-2008 and 2013-2014, the cap remained static at $58.6m, give or take a few hundred grand, which went along way towards setting expectations for "market" value.

So here is what $58.6m looks like in 2016-17 cap dollars.

$5m in 2007-2013 dollars = $8m.

$7.5m = $12m

$10m = $16m

$12.5m = $20m

$15 = $24m.

Now people make the argument that just because the cap is going up that does not mean player's values necessarily go up in the same proportion and in fact, that's EXACTLY the NBA and NBAPA's intent and design.

Roster size has stayed the same. The salary floor has increased from 75% to 90%, and the % of BRI the players receive has gone down from 51% or 44.74%, meaning the players are actually getting LESS of the explosion of revenue they got in the last CBA.

In other words, increasing individual player's salary in proportion to the percentage of revenue they receive is SPECIFICALLY what it is supposed to do. A player who would have made $10m making $16m is exactly what the NBA wants/needs to happen.

And in fact, given players on rookie contracts got screwed in the current CBA, and their scale does not increase in proportion to the cap and neither do the ML exceptions, that just increases the likelihood of any warm body free agent actually receiving a HIGHER proportion of the cap in comparisons to 2007-2008.

Also because better than 3/4 of the NBA play on contracts (meaning relative percentages) written during lower caps, and the salary floor increases in proportion to the cap, that just puts more market pressure on teams to spend immediately.

NBA teams HAVE to spend the money. They can either spend the increased dollars on individual free agent targets, or simply distribute it among their roster at the end of the year, and in a competitive environment, it makes more sense for them to do the former.

Lastly, the NBPA knows this math better than anyone. Players aren't going into the market individually and against one another. You can be certain the union is advising them as to what their relative value looks like.

There is NO scenario in which salaries to do not increase in proportion to the rise in cap and numerous reasons why free agent salaries will rise in a greater proportion to the rise in cap.

It will occur, be prepared.

shinmen wrote:If all players would reveive a raise by a percentage of the new salary cap, I'd have no problem. The problem is the transition between older contracts and current ones.
If a guy like Crabbe get a salary of like 16M when Stephen Curry get 11M, there is something wrong and the transition should be handled differently.

That's a fair argument, but the train has already left the station.

Curry will get his... his next contract will be what, $180-200m or so?