For every $10M above salary cap, your opponent get 1 point at the start of the game

[iamgine]

So if the salary cap is $100M and your team salary is $150M vs an opposing team whose salary is $120M, you'll start the game 0-3.

Good/bad idea?

[rawimpact]

So if the salary cap is $100M and your team salary is $150M vs an opposing team whose salary is $120M, you'll start the game 0-3.

Good/bad idea?

So a single possession change for having 30M more?

What are you trying to fix?

[Real Men Wear Green]

Interesting idea but it would put too much pressure on players to accept lesser contracts. Union would never go for it and it would also lead to even more games where the best team doesn't win.

[Real Men Wear Green]

They absolutely could and should use this as a reason to weight draft lottery odds though.

[Spurs m8]

Should be 1 point for every 1m tbh

Or just have a real cap

[iamgine]

Should be 1 point for every 1m tbh

Or just have a real cap

:lol that's too much

Maybe 1 every $5M is plausible.

[Spurs m8]

:lol that's too much

Maybe 1 every $5M is plausible.

Nah its alright....

In this league, if you have an extra max player for example, you're 40m up...that max player needs to score his 40...its doable.

Or...don't get an extra max player, and play on a more level playing field

[Thenameless]

Yeah, I'm not really into this soft cap, hard cap stuff. A team should not need a "capologist".

Make one hard cap, but make it high so superstars can be paid what they're worth, and so that teams don't get gutted if they win a championship.

[Jasper]

So if the salary cap is $100M and your team salary is $150M vs an opposing team whose salary is $120M, you'll start the game 0-3.

Good/bad idea?

point for every million so in your example 30 points....
(who was the center that got like 122 million and he was an average player - but was one of the Michigan fade five ???)
You would not lose a game - a season because of his salary.