Adam Silver Talks Warriors, Playoffs, Free Agency

It isn’t “necessarily” bad that the Warriors are so dominant, NBA commissioner Adam Silver said during a Tuesday press conference in Las Vegas (link via Mark Medina of The Mercury News). Silver explained that the NBA isn’t trying to create a “forced parity,” but wants to ensure that there’s a “parity of opportunity” for the league’s 30 teams.

“There’s a fair point to be made in a tax system when certain teams are spending significantly more than others, that’s not parity of opportunity,” Silver added.Also, certain teams have advantages other teams don’t based on their resources and market and the wealth of the market. They may be in a position to go deeper into the tax than another team does.

“Under the current system right now, we want teams to compete like crazy. The Warriors, within the framework of this deal, should be doing everything they can to increase their dominance,” Silver continued. “That’s what you want to see. We want every team to compete in every way they can within the rules. If it makes sense to make adjustments to the rules next time, we’ll look into that.”

Here are a few more notable comments from Silver’s Tuesday’s presser:

  • Silver acknowledged that the idea of seeding teams 1 through 16 in the postseason has “real appeal,” but cautioned that it would take time to implement (link via Ohm Youngmisuk of ESPN). “In our estimate, we could be looking at roughly 40-50% more travel,” Silver said. “It doesn’t mean we can’t, but it is not something we can do quickly. It would require really a wholesale re-examination of how we do the schedule, how our television deal works.”
  • The NBA may make adjustments to the start of the free agent period to avoid having it begin at midnight ET on July 1, according to Silver (via Youngmisuk). With so much attention focused on free agency, the league would like to avoid having the first wave of major signings break in the middle of the night.
  • Silver spoke about the California Classic Summer League, adding that it “exceeded all expectations,” as NBC Sports California relays (on Twitter). The league will discuss expanding it beyond the current structure, which only features four teams, including the host Kings.
  • According to Silver, the investigation into workplace misconduct allegations in the Mavericks‘ business offices should wrap up by the end of July (link via Tim Reynolds of The Associated Press).
  • As we detailed on Tuesday night, Silver suggested that the NBA expects to make adjustments to its one-and-done rule for prospects in the coming years.

Luke Adams contributed to this post.

newest oldest

9 thoughts on “Adam Silver Talks Warriors, Playoffs, Free Agency

  1. justinept

    There needs to be two separate caps in the NBA – one for players acquired in a player’s first 4 years (either through the draft or trade). And a second cap for FAs acquired after their first four years in the league (either through trade or FA.)

    Have different limitations on each cap such as allowing a team to exceed the first one by x% but allow zero flexibility on the second cap.

    0
    0
    • I give no fox

      I like the outside the box thinking, but that won’t really solve the problem since players are under rookie scale contracts in their first 4 years. There is no wiggle room, it is based on draft slot. So a hard cap is the way to go. Also, in your scenario, if a team trades for multiple picks in one draft what are they to do? Sorry Atlanta, you can’t have yours and Dallas top 10 picks coz you will go over your salary cap for rookies. And teams that consistently pick in the lotto will have issues with the cap because those players make exponentially more than players selected outside the lottery

      0
      0
  2. The NBA will never, and should never, go to a hard cap. The reasons it works in the NFL are precisely the reasons it would be a disaster in the NBA. The economic models are polar opposites. Hard caps preclude fully guaranteed contracts and/or long term contracts. They mean mass player movement year to year except for young players on initial contracts and maybe a single star so long as his level of play didn’t drop from its peak. They essentially eliminate trades. In the NBA, as opposed the NFL, it would cut the value of small and mid market franchises, and the independent market-ability of star players, dramatically. Amidst the shrinking pie, the only possible beneficiaries would be large market teams, whose franchises have independent recognition and fan support independent of who the players are. A league of maybe 20 teams could survive. On the court, it could level the playing field, but it would become a isolation league that is devoid of the value of guys playing and developing together over years.

    1
    0
  3. sportznut1000

    yeah every proposed solution has some flaws which is exactly why it shouldnt be changed. really this is just a fluke where the warriors have caught a perfect storm. the warriors have not had a “bad contract” during their run which has made this team possible. usually a great team still has a bad contract which hinders them from being “unbeatable” for example ryan anderson on the rockets or luol deng of the lakers. the rockets were a chris paul or maybe even a mbah muete injury away from beating the warriors in 6 last year. imagine how much better they could have been if they had a player worthy of the contract ryan anderson has. the warriors are being rewarded for no bad signings and great drafting but it will come to an end shortly.

    0
    0
  4. Agree with DXC & sportznut1000. Also I’d like to add that I hate the fact that in the NFL contracts are not guaranteed, so players get hurt, get cut. I do prefer much more the NBA’s system, more security for players which in turn gives more entertainment on the court, I do like & enjoy the NFL, but really the NBA is by a country mile so much better to watch & enjoy, a far superior product in my opinion.

    0
    0
  5. Parity of opportunity… At least one of the Lakers, Spurs, Cavs, Heat, and Warriors have been in every Finals matchup for the last 20 years.

    0
    0
  6. justin-turner overdrive

    NBA: Lakers & Celtics: 33 titles
    Rest of league: 39 titles

    Yet NO ONE is talking about how the Lakers and Celtics are the real issue here? The Warriors, who probably will be back in last place in 5 years, are having a moment and all you worthless idiot haters wont let them. Stop talking about the Warriors and start talking about how LA and Boston need to be stopped, or just stop talking, period.

    1
    1
    • gammaraze

      Yeah, someone’s on something…
      Since 1990 (that’s 28 years ago), the Celtics have ONE championship and the Lakers have 5.
      That’s Lakers & Celtics 6, Rest of NBA 22. Looks like that’s already been accomplished, kinda like you’ve been asleep for 30 years.

      0
      0
  7. formerlyz

    I know how you fix things…stop complaining and get better, and beat them. Parity at the top has never been a thing historically. Its arguable there is more parity in the league right now than ever. If a team wants to go super deep in luxury tax or hard cap themselves, it’s on them. Spending money doesnt win championships, and that has been proven time and again. Build properly and play the right way, and you have a chance

    0
    1

Leave a Reply