The NBA and the National Basketball Players Association reached a deal on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement early on Saturday morning, according to statements from the league and the players’ union.
The official announcements are light on specific details, simply stating that the new agreement is tentative and still needs to be ratified by the players and team owners. The NBA and NBPA said that they’ll announce more details once the new CBA is official.
However, Adrian Wojnarowski of ESPN and Shams Charania of The Athletic, who initially broke word of the agreement, have already shared several of the most interesting changes in the new CBA.
According to Wojnarowski, the NBA and NBPA agreed at the last minute to push back the Friday, March 31 deadline for either side to opt out of the current CBA, since they felt they were closing in on an agreement. A few hours later, a tentative deal was in place.
The new CBA will begin in 2023/24 and will cover the next seven years, with a mutual opt-out after year six, Wojnarowski adds.
Here are some of the most notable ways the NBA will change in the new CBA, as reported by Wojnarowski and Charania:
An in-season tournament could show up on the NBA schedule as soon as the 2023/24 season, if all the details are hammered out in time, according to ESPN. The first round of the tournament will be part of the regular season schedule, with the top eight teams advancing to a single-elimination event in December. The “Final Four” will be played at a neutral site — Las Vegas is among the cities receiving consideration.
It sounds like the plan is for NBA teams to have 80 regular season games scheduled as normal, with some of those games serving as the first round of the in-season tournament, per Tim Reynolds of The Associated Press (Twitter link). The leftover games for the teams that don’t make the single-elimination portion of the tournament would be scheduled at a later date, while the two teams that make the final of the tournament would ultimately end up playing 83 games.
Prize money for the in-season tournament would be $500K per player, reports Charania (Twitter link).
Second tax apron
The NBA’s current “tax apron” is set a few million dollars above the luxury tax line. For instance, in 2022/23, the tax line is $150,267,000 and the tax apron is $156,983,000. Teams above the tax apron aren’t permitted to acquire players via sign-and-trade, use more than the taxpayer portion of the mid-level exception, or use the bi-annual exception.
In the new CBA, the league will implement a second tax apron that’s $17.5MM over the tax line, per ESPN. Clubs whose team salary is above that second apron will no longer have access to the taxpayer mid-level exception in free agency.
As Wojnarowski points out, that means taxpayer MLE signings like Donte DiVincenzo (Warriors), Joe Ingles (Bucks), Danilo Gallinari (Celtics), and John Wall (Clippers) wouldn’t have been permitted last summer, given how far those teams were over the tax line.
This changes will be “eased into” the salary cap over the next few years, according to ESPN’s report. Wojnarowski adds that there are expected to be new spending opportunities in free agency and on the trade market for non-taxpaying teams, though there are no details yet on how those new opportunties will work.
Minimum games-played requirement for postseason awards
As expected, the NBA will set a minimum number of games played for players to qualify for postseason awards, including MVP, Rookie of the Year, and All-NBA. That minimum will be 65 games, though it will come with some “conditions,” says Wojnarowski.
The ostensible goal of this change is to reduce teams’ generous deployment of “load management.” It will have the added effect of helping to simplify the criteria for award voters.
Bigger first year-raises on veteran contract extensions
Under the current CBA, a veteran who signs a contract extension can receive up to 120% of his previous salary in the first year of a new deal — or 120% of the NBA’s average salary, if he’s earning less than the league average.
The new CBA will increase that limit to 140% of the player’s previous salary, per Wojnarowski and Charania. It’s unclear at this point whether players earning less than the league average will also be able to make up to 140% of the average NBA salary in the first year of a veteran extension.
This rule change could benefit players like Jaylen Brown, OG Anunoby, and Domantas Sabonis, who will be eligible for extensions but who are earning well below their market value and likely wouldn’t have agreed to an extension that features a 20% first-year raise (40% may still not be enough in some cases, but it at least should increase the odds of a deal).
Extra two-way contract slot
Teams will be permitted to carry three players on two-way contracts in the new CBA rather than two, according to Wojnarowski and Charania. That will result in 90 league-wide two-way slots instead of just 60.
Players will no longer be tested for marijuana under the new CBA, tweets Charania. The process of phasing out marijuana testing has been ongoing for a few years. Random marijuana testing was a part of the current CBA, but the NBA and NBPA agreed not to resume those tests during the 2020 bubble in Orlando and has stuck with that policy ever since.
More details on the new CBA will likely be reported in the coming days and weeks as the league and the union work on formally ratifying the new agreement and getting it in place in time for the coming offseason.
37 thoughts on “NBA, NBPA Reach Tentative Deal On New CBA”
It’s just the players and silver getting richer and everyone else gets cut at the last second so you don’t get guaranteed money. Let’s give these millionaires some more money. The most important people
Just fire silver
No marijuana testing. Good. Moving into the modern era. Why ban a drug which helps w pain & helps people relax & manage stress.
Bad move by the players. They should have forced a season long strike
It might help if, you know, you actually articulated why you think that.
He’s just playing bas-ket-balllllll
Well anyone with any common sense would know why. But since youre dense I’ll explain.
The league have been playing too many games with these players. For example, the pointless and uncalled for technicals. This is all in order to control the players. On top of the Kyrie and Ja Morant stuff.
But the reality is, the NBA can exist without the owners at this point, but it can’t exist without the players. The players could literally force owners out of the league if they really wanted too.
*Inserts polarizing and completely subjective assertion
aNyOnE wItH a BrAiN wOuLd ReAlIzE tHiS
*inserts useless comment to deflect from the fact they have no actual argument
bUt BuT U WrOnG
I didn’t say anything about whether or not I agree.
The comment had everything to do with how you were acting like a condescending jerk
The NBA appears to be headed into a period of massive decline.
A way overpriced product with players who don’t play hard, and are always injured.
Meaningless regular season (everybody gets in playoffs) that now needs “gimmicks” like an in-season tournament to attempt to get players to actually try, and to keep fan interest from further declining.
Players making ridiculous amounts of money for a product that just isn’t that good anymore.
Clearly, you have not watched enough “good” basketball to know what “bad” basketball is.
“Rule Changes” have nothing to do with what is good for the game ….. It is only about what they are thinking will generate more viewership ($$$$). That is why they used “rules” to get rid of the true “post” player. The big man brought balance. The game is out of whack now. Just pick n rolls, 3s and isolations for star players. No strategy. Coach is irrelevant until he gets fired.
Clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about.
You are right, the rules are made in order to adhere to what they “think” is better for viewership. But what you don’t understand is, what they “think” is not always, or ever accurate to the reality.
Avg viewership in 2010 was 18million. Last year 12million. Proof that everything you just said was dumb asf
@Kurtis Blow Your comment proves what I am saying. I didn’t say it worked!! They screwed it up. They tried to make the game like NBA2k with unlimited offense thinking young people would start watching …… They Were Wrong!!!
Viewership continues to dip because they have a bad product. A product they made bad by trying to “tweak” the game to make more profits.
Rules changes have brought us the Play-In Tournament. Basically, you are not officially “eliminated” until the end of the season. Regular Season is meaningless. 82 games worth of stealing money from fans. Star players are either hurt, or sitting out for “maintenance”. Fans don’t know who is gonna play until the lineup is announced. Paying Top $$$ for ALL the games though.
Ok. My bad. I didn’t realize you made the original post, so I thought your second post was arguing with your first post, and not the “ok,boomer” comment. I often don’t look at the username, just the context and the way this comment section is designed I made a mistake. My apologies
The only thing wrong about your comment is that the decline is already happening. Viewership has decline over 33% in the last five years. Which is quite a bad sign considering the League pass is actually becoming more accessible and the price has decreased. And this year, I was even able to watch the games that were supposed to be blacked out.
Viewership decline doesn’t matter, younger fans watch clips and highlights on YouTube. The league gets engagement there.
Simple question. Would you rather watch a big man pound the court for 19 seconds then throw up a prayer or would you rather watch a highlight reel dunk on a fast break? I’ve been watching the game for 42 years and love the craft of the post up but I’d much rather watch Curry nail three after three and Morant posterizing that same big man.
A highlight reel dunk on a fast break? Wtf you talking about? Who cares? That’s the same as a layup line dunk or a dunk contest. I don’t want to see that nonsense.
You saw posterizing dunks way more back in the 90s, early 2000s than you see now. Defenders just get out of the way now. It’s basically watching an all-star game. Ja is the only one in the past 10+ years throwing down posters. And it only happens cause rim protectors keep underestimating him. It will be a matter of time before they start letting him waltz in the lane.
If your only argument is YouTube reels, then you have no argument.
@tacocat1331 … “Younger Fans Watch Clips”???? Guess what …. “Clips” for engagement = No Revenue. No advertising is attached. They need people to watch the “Games”. Not clips. Games is where the Ads are. The sale of the ads is why ESPN, TNT, etc pay billions for the right to broadcast. It is so they can sell the ads. If you watch no ads (games) then your advertisers (who pay) get NO benefit.
I am in full agreement that the decline begin over a decade ago. However, the decline is not only continuing, but picking up the pace.
The fact that League Pass (streaming) is showing a price decline, and you can see Blacked Out games is also a horrific sign for the NBA. ALL the money comes from the TV deals, and primarily ESPN. It ALL comes from cable tv subscribers, and people are continuing to ditch cable in record numbers. It is ALL going to streaming, and the revenue is WAY lower on the streaming model. It ain’t even close! It makes these TV deals being signed absolutely ridiculous. Regional providers are going bankrupt (Bally Sports).
Streaming revenue (paid only from those who subscribe to the streaming service) is so far less than the cable money (paid from ALL cable subscribers every month regardless if they watch games). It will ALL ultimately be streamed.
This is ALL going to end VERY badly for the NBA, MLB, NHL and College Sports in the coming years. NFL will be fine.
An in season tournament is ridiculous. Guaranteed the players end up taking that entire time off realizing those games don’t matter.
It sounds like teams’ records in those games will count toward the regular season, with the added bonus of $500K per player for the winning team. Not sure what reason players would have to treat those games as less important than the rest of the regular season.
They don’t currently treat the Regular Season as important which is why the “gimmick” of the In-Season Tournament was created.
$500k per player to the “winning” team. Yet, ESPN, who is broadcasting the games, is in the process of firing staff because of “budget” cuts.
That information isn’t relat8ve to each other at all.
@dangerbone How many jobs could be saved for $500k to 15 players???? Further jobs would be saved since the In-Season Tournament is a “revenue generator” with a TV deal attached. More money for Players, Owners … Higher prices for fans ….. Lost jobs for others. in other words …. Rewarding bad behavior.
I’m not sure an extra $500k is going to entice starting players who make $10-40million to want to play.
I’m curious how it will effect the standings. Are they going to do a point system like college? I’m sure that will go over well.
The in-season tournament is ridiculous. Shrugging off marijuana testing is just catering to players even more and I challenge that minimum games-for-awards thing. I guarantee that should Anthony Davis play 64 games, they’ll find a Laker Loophole.
Seeing as it’s a 60 game minimum, the “Laker Loophole” would be he played 4 more games necessary to qualify.
And I hate the Lakers, so don’t lump me in there when you realize you’re a moron.
Per this article:
“That minimum will be 65 games, though it will come with some “conditions,” says Wojnarowski.”
So…… who’s the moron? Derp! You’re obviously a Laker fan
Imagine a year where maybe the top20 players didn’t play 65 games and some decent (but not MVP) all-star won MVP. (Maybe a bunch only got to 64)
I’m actually going to look forward to the chaos of that. LOL
“Shrugging off marijuana testing is just catering to players”
It’s 2023, dude. No one cares about marijuana. Alcohol is far more dangerous and it isn’t tested for.
I see the NBA owners got the new rule in about FA mid level because of the warriors.
Hopefully something comes out about an improvement to the referee situation…
Typical Silver-era CBA, as telegraphed. Not a single real issue is addressed. Under this CBA, the NBA, as a league, will continue to be defined by the issues of tanking, a lack of defense, a marginalization of the regular season and the absence of any real free agency. Apparently, this is what Silver, and his merry band of so-called “small market” owners, want, as they control the owner side of the CBA process. The second apron was added just so they can drive home that point, really.
I’m only puzzled as to why the other owners, in CBA after CBA, keep letting them add complex / silly new rules that purport to be a cure for some of the league’s ailments, when they are pretty clearly disingenuous efforts. Shouldn’t, at a minimum, the last CBA’s failed provisions be revoked first. Why is Silver’s grand idea to eliminate tanking (the play-in) still in the new CBA when its impact has been to facilitate a golden age of tanking?
So what happens if the Players and Owners don’t like this new CBA? Holdout? Or do they have to go back in and rewrite it to satisfy.
Man a bunch of up and coming teams got screwed with their young core about to reach extension/free agency … or, maybe their owners like it because they won’t be able to keep their drafted players because of the “cap” and not have to spend.
Surprised there’s no mention of maybe diminishing the cap hit on drafted players for teams.