Things became a little tense after Carmelo Anthony, Vice President of the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA), reported over the weekend that he was skeptical of a new collective bargaining agreement between the NBA and NBPA being agreed to prior to the December 15 deadline over a licensing issue. In a delightful pivot, the NBA and NBPA surprisingly reached an agreement in principle on a new seven-year CBA late on Wednesday night.
NBA fans can partly exhale, as a potential strike is likely avoided, although both parties still have to ratify the agreement by January 13 of the new year, a mutually agreed upon extension of the original opt-out date. Still, the news is unquestionably positive, as the league has never been deeper with watchable talent and will now likely not face derailment of potential games lost. Specific details of the agreement will continue to trickle in, but thanks to David Aldridge of NBA.com, we have some much appreciated specifics to work with.
Since I mostly focus on young players and draft prospects on this website, the following reactions will be tailored specifically to new CBA impact on college players and young prospects in the league. Let’s roll through them.
Retention of the One-and-Done Rule
The biggest issue involving young players in the league resides in draft age eligibility and the established “one-and-done” rule. This rule stipulates that U.S. high school players must be one year removed from high school to be draft eligible (the player must also turn 19-years-old in the calendar year of the draft, which applies to all players, foreign and domestic). As Yahoo’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported on Twitter, the one-and-done rule is being retained for now:
The NBA, per Aldridge’s report, was seeking a standardized minimum 20-year-old age limit for draft eligibility (Wojnarowski clarified this applies to U.S. high school players), while the NBPA wanted no age restriction. The two sides have tabled the issue for now, but an interesting nugget came from Aldridge in the form of the NBPA being potentially open to a “zero and two” compromise.
Read More: Durant & Curry torch teams without even touching the ball
A “zero and two” rule would enable high school players who turn 19 in the year of the draft to declare right out of high school, the policy idea being not to restrict freedom of movement for young players and more importantly opening up an avenue for young players to get paid quicker. On the other side of the coin, players who elect to attend college must attend for at least two years instead of one, the policy here being to protect the college product with lesser turnover.
I’m of the opinion that the current one-and-done rule is optimal, being admittedly a fan heavily skewed toward the NBA product. It’s difficult enough to evaluate talent in one year of college. Opening up high school scouting as the primary sample of draft evaluation sizably increases draft error likelihood and franchise-crippling decisions, because the athleticism and talent gap is more uneven on that level. Austin Rivers and Harrison Barnes were once considered the next Kobe Bryant because of their respective high school exploits. Without a more meaningful sample these are damning situations to place executives in.
While nothing is certain at this point, the NBA and NBPA both seem amenable to amending the one-and-done status quo, which will have significant ramifications if altered. This is definitely an aspect to track moving forward.
Creation of two-way contracts
The overlap and connection between the NBA and the NBA Development League has grown stronger over time, with more NBA teams utilizing their affiliate teams to create opportunities for young players. Rookies can swing down from parent NBA teams to development teams an infinite amount of times during their first year, which is crucial as most first year guys are not in NBA rotations immediately. Teams can also use their development teams to recreate their own schemes and stylistic approach to better advance players along the learning curve. The overall synergy between the two entities has significantly enhanced as a result.
To account for this, part of the new CBA reportedly includes “two-way contracts”, a new contract feature paying players who swing between the two leagues an increased amount ranging from a total of $75,000 to $100,000, far more than standard NBA Development League salaries. Doing so lessens the incentive for players to pursue more lucrative money overseas, allowing teams to retain their “investment” in their own players.
To adjust for this in terms of roster size, the agreement expands maximum in-season rosters from 15 to 17, with the 16th and 17th spots consisting of two-way contract players. This benefits young players in this situation with enhanced pay, and also opens more roster spots for other players in the league. It’s a win-win brilliant move. Our own NBA Development League guru Chris Reichert will undoubtedly have much more on this to come.
Increased rookie scale and minimum salary pay
Rookie scale contracts, especially the No. 1 overall pick, have traditionally been among the most valuable “assets” a team can have, with four years of team cost control at very affordable amounts. The value of these contracts was magnified sizably with the recent cap spike, as rookie scale salaries aren’t tied to the salary cap, and are instead fixed ahead of time at the beginning of CBA ratification. The same fixed nature also applies to minimum exception and minimum salary contracts. In sum, these two signing mechanisms apply most often for young NBA players, rookie scale amounts for first round picks and minimum salary for second round picks.
While there is still some ambiguity in terms of exact percentage increase, with Wojnarowski reporting an expected increase of 50 percent (the reference point is not clear) and Tim Bontemps of the Washington Post reporting a 45 percent increase for 2017-18 season, both rookie scale and minimum salaries are now tied to the cap and will increase significantly as a result. More money for young players is a good thing!
Next: Kristaps Porzingis is unguardable in the pick-and-pop
It will also be interesting to see how the increase in rookie scale amounts for first round picks impacts the proliferation of trades. With the previous fixed structure, a first round pick from a production to cost ratio was incredibly valuable and made dealing away first rounders unappealing, especially to teams in a financial crunch who needed cost effective producers to fit under the cap in the team-building process.
With first round pick contract amounts increasing and being more responsive to the increased cap, it could encourage teams to part with picks more frequently, as the cost effective nature of these picks isn’t what it once was.