Why NBA collective bargaining ...

As I was thinking about Bradley Beal's dedication to the Washington Wizards a few months ago, I was struck by the double-edged sword that is the NBA's supermax deal.

Beal, a three-time All-Star, two-time 30 point-per-game scorer, and one-time All-NBA pick, is chastised for accepting the five-year, $251 million contract he earned as one of the game's top players, and the Wizards are chastised for paying him. Both want to win a championship together, but paying a local star to be one may prevent them from delivering that promise to the customers who pay his wage.

Therefore, in light of the recent collective bargaining discussions, I began asking around about any difficulties anybody had with supermax contracts and its 35% link to the wage ceiling. One agent's comment that struck me the most was, "There are so many faults with it, I wouldn't even know where to begin."

I've walked down that rabbit hole and seen the same light months later, following two extensions of a December deadline for either the NBA or its players' union to opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement at season's conclusion. There can never be a solution that will please all parties. The obstacles to substantial modifications to the existing salary cap structure are also too large for both parties to reach an agreement on a totally new vision before the current CBA ends in 2024, let alone by the March 31 opt-out date.

This comes before the league's current nine-year, $24 billion media rights contract expires in 2025, when the current deal might be doubled or perhaps tripled.Breakdowns in CBA discussions may have an influence on the next order of business, therefore both the NBA and NBPA expect to reach a collective bargaining agreement sooner rather than later, league sources told Yahoo Sports. "Everyone benefits, so why mess with the gravy train?" one insider said.

Who benefits the most is a different story, and it may have to wait until the next CBA, when the discrepancy between the haves and (relative) have-nots will be much wider than it is today. Yet, modest changes to the compensation structure might enhance the current system ahead of another limit increase (to an anticipated $171 million) in the 2025-26 season, benefiting clubs, players, and fans of both.

The NBA's dwindling middle class

Reasons exist for every NBA player to complain about the salary cap. It is, at best, restrictive by a magnitude of millions per player and, at worst, in place only to save billionaire team owners from their spending habits.

The rookie scale, which assigns a salary to every draft pick, is inherently unfair, severely limiting a first-round selection's earning power for at least the initial four years of his career. Dallas Mavericks superstar Luka Doncic, en route to a third first-team All-NBA selection, was the league's 121st highest-paid player last year. His five-year, $215 million maximum extension, featuring a starting salary at 30% of the current $123.7 million salary cap, did not begin until this season. Even that falls well short of his actual value.

Not only does Doncic fail to qualify for the 35% supermax until 2026 (eight years into his career), he already counts among the handful of players who could command more than 50% of the cap if there was no limit to max salaries. Before the last round of negotiations, Kobe Bryant estimated LeBron James was worth $75 million to the Cleveland Cavaliers in a free market. Each team's salary cap at the time was $63.1 million.

There is no 'fair' in collective bargaining

This may be fair in the context of a salary cap, although the system itself is inherently unfair to all players. Stars drive revenue. In a free market, their salaries would still significantly outpace those of the players who elevate their teams from playoff to championship contention. Mid-tier deals like those doled out during the cap spike-induced spending spree in 2016 free agency are proof that: 1) team owners would not be able to help themselves in the absence of a cap, and 2) rank-and-file players are more likely to be "overpaid" with a cap.

Do not bat an eyelash when superstars earn $70 million starting salaries as the cap exceeds $200 million in the not-so-distant future. Most will be worth more than that. Remember, the average franchise valuation has risen at a rate (roughly 1,200%) four times the growth of the salary cap over the past two decades. In the NBA's first season removed from in-arena pandemic restrictions, only the Brooklyn Nets — a failed super-team experiment in the league's largest media market — lost money last year, according to Forbes.

Tinkering around the edges of a new CBA

There is room for negotiation within the existing system, so long as everyone understands its innate issues. It makes no sense to have rules in place that a) prevent players from earning a 35% max salary into their prime and b) more often result in past-their-prime players with 10 years of service making the most money.

Going back to the Celtics, Jayson Tatum is limited to the 25% max because his two All-NBA selections sandwiched the one season he needed to achieve that status in order to qualify for a 30% max. Never mind he was one of the 15 best players in the league — and worthy of a 35% max — by age 22.

The double-edged sword of supermax contracts

None of this solves the fact that not all max salary players are the same. Phoenix Suns center Deandre Ayton, who found one team in free agency willing to offer him the 25% max, is on the same deal as Tatum, who would have all 30 teams lining up to pay him far more than the 35% max if they could. The cap feeds on this inequity, and that may also be unfair contextually. One team's best player will be better than the next, but it will result in situations where Beal gets his 35% max 10 years into his career, and everyone is mad.

The success rate of teams paying 35% of the cap to any one player is especially low. The pool of players eligible to receive that contract is limited to a) 10-year veterans and b) anyone seven years into his career who has been a) voted the Defensive Player of the Year or to an All-NBA team in his most recent season or both of the two previous seasons, or b) who has named MVP in any of his three most recent seasons. (Keep in mind, most rookie extensions carry a player through his eighth or ninth season in the league.)