Dunc'd On Prime

All-Defense

All-Defensive teams will be positionless under the new Collective Bargaining Agreement. They're currently each two guards, two forwards and two centers.

Guards aren't going to like that.

Though some disagree, I'm among the many who believe bigger players tend to have greater defensive impact. My All-Defensive teams are often an exercise of jamming as many forward/centers onto the forward line and as many guard/forwards onto the guard line as possible.

Not that guards or wings will never deserve All-Defense recognition. But if picking any five players for All-Defensive first team then any five players for All-Defensive second team, bigs will definitely be overrepresented. For example, my All-Defensive first team this year would've been:

• Draymond Green
• Jaren Jackson Jr.
• Brook Lopez
• Evan Mobley
• Anthony Davis

At least if ignoring Jackson and Davis not being eligible due to games played. Speaking of…

Awards criteria

The games-played minimum will apply to only MVP, All-NBA, Defensive Player of the Year, All-Defense and Most Improved Player.

I.e., not Rookie of the Year, All-Rookie, Sixth Man of the Year and NBA Finals MVP.*

*Finals MVP is a Generally Recognized League Honor under the current CBA. Though it sounds silly Finals MVP could fall under this rule, I wanted to confirm it didn't. This whole rule is silly, after all.

I previously found 170 honors in NBA history went to players who played fewer than 65 games (or a proportional threshold in a shorter season).*

Of those 170, the most common honor was All-Rookie (60 instances). The most common individual award was Rookie of the Year (six instances). Sixth Man of the Year was second (two instances).**

So, not including those honors will drastically reduce the effect of this rule.

Not as much as I'd like, which is just eliminating the rule completely. But the league will at least avoid the preposterous and would've-been-inevitable situation of not enough rookies being eligible to fill two All-Rookie teams.

*This was before we knew about the minute requirements.

**Tied with Defensive Player of the Year.

De facto no-trade clauses

When a player re-signs on a one-year contract under the current CBA, he can't be traded without his consent.

Under the new CBA, that right to consent to a trade will be negotiable at the time of signing.

I can definitely see teams offering more money in exchange for a player agreeing to bypass the de facto no-trade clause.

As we previously discussed, walking trade exceptions could be more common under the new CBA. Big-spending teams will be severely limited in their ability to acquire outside players. Having an extra tradeable contract could come in quite handy (if willing to pay the real-dollar cost).

This rule change clears a path for creating those walking trade exceptions.

Buyouts

Teams over the first apron – not just the second apron – will be prohibited from signing players during the season who were earning more than the non-taxpayer mid-level exception and were waived during the season.

This puts a major damper on the buyout* market. Usually, bought-out players leave bad teams for good teams – and good teams tend to be bigger spenders. Good teams below the first apron can still sign these players, but that's obviously a smaller pool of options. Players considering taking a buyout will therefore be more likely to stay with their current team.

One possible unintended consequence of this rule: Players might pressure teams for a buyout before the season when they previously might have been content staying together until the trade deadline. This rule applies to only players waived during the regular season. But buyouts are rarely seen as forthcoming that far in advance. Usually, the circumstances of the season dictate a buyout.

*In buyouts, players sacrifice some of their remaining salary in exchange for becoming free agents. Sometimes, players just get waived without a buyout. They're usually conflated, as focus is on players who are released to change teams in-season regardless of the method. This rule makes no distinction whether a player is waived with or without a buyout.

Joakim Noah rule

In the summer of 2018, the Knicks decided to waive Joakim Noah, who was due $18,530,000 the upcoming season and $19,295,000 the following season.

However, if waiving him then, New York would've had two choices – count the remaining money as originally due the next two seasons or stretch the $37,825,000 over the next five years (remaining seasons on the contract plus one) in equal $7,565,000 installments.

The Knicks wanted to eat as much money as possible immediately while also maximizing 2019 cap space to pursue free agents like Kevin Durant, Kyrie Irving, Kawhi Leonard and Kemba Walker.

So, New York waited until after Sept. 1 to waive Noah. By that point, by rule, his 2018-19 salary could no longer be stretched – but the 2019-20 salary still could. So, the Knicks took an $18,530,000 cap hit in 2018-19 then a $6,431,667 cap hit each of the following three seasons.

Noah certainly didn't like this process. He felt trapped during the summer of 2018. New York no longer wanted him but had to wait until the fall to waive him and let him become a free agent.

It backfired on the Knicks, too. They struck out on all their top targets in 2019 free agency. With hindsight of the 2019 offseason, they probably would've just accepted the entire cap hit that year and maximized flexibility in 2020 and 2021. (That might have cost them Julius Randle. But who knew he'd keep improving this much?)

Well, the new CBA will allow teams a one-time opportunity by Aug. 31 of any year to stretch the remaining salaries of a player already waived under the new CBA.

If this applied to Noah's situation, the Knicks could've waived him in the summer of 2018, immediately granted him the freedom he wanted. Then, in the 2019 offseason, New York could've decided whether to eat his entire $19,295,000 that season or spread it into equal $6,431,667 cap hits the the next three seasons. The Knicks wouldn't have had to guess in 2018 whether they'd want the extra spending power in 2019. They could've decided in 2019.

This rule might not be used often, but when it is, the ramifications could be sizable.

Second-round exception

The new second-round exception provides two allowable contract structures:

• Three years, including a team option. First-year salary can be up to the minimum for players with one year of experience.
• Four years, including a team option. First-and second-year salaries can be up to the minimum for players with two years of experience.

In both cases, salaries in the last two seasons would be what someone on a multi-year rookie minimum would earn.

As we've seen, maximums often turn into baselines. Though allowed, I'd be surprised if players sign through this exception without getting highest allowable salaries.

Summer league

First-round picks nearly always get the maximum 120% of their rookie-scale salaries. However, under the previous CBA, they counted toward the cap at 100% of scale until signed. That gave teams incentive to delay making those inevitable contracts official.

Which created complications for summer league. Players wanted protections of a contract before competing in Las Vegas or Orlando or wherever.

The current CBA fixed the issue by immediately counting first-round picks at 120% of scale until signed. That eliminated incentive for teams to delay signing their first-round picks.

The new CBA will address the issue with many second-round picks.

Second-rounders signed through the second-round exception won't count against the cap until July 31, even if officially signed earlier. So, the players can have contractual security before summer league and teams can have cap flexibility.

Extensions

Players sometimes decline a player option then re-sign on a new long-term contract with a lower starting salary but more total compensation.

They'll be able to do that via extension in the new CBA.

The new CBA removes a rule prohibiting an extension that pays less in the first year than the salary in a declined option year.

I could see this new rule being used frequently. However, I'm not sure how consequential it'll be. If players were going to reach the same terms via opting out/re-signing as opting out/extending, it's generally not a big deal. But there could be some instances where the timing is significant.

Combine

Players invited to the combine can't enter the NBA until participating in the combine, according to Jonathan Givony of ESPN. Which means invited players must attend the combine – which, as we already knew, means they must undergo physicals.

This is framed as invited players needing to attend the combine to be draft eligible. But only players who've gone through a draft can sign in the NBA. So, there's no workaround to skip the combine and immediately enter free agency.

The rights of players not yet in the league – i.e., players who don't yet vote in the union – are always the easiest to trade away at the bargaining table.

Player poll

The Athletic polled players on several questions, and the results are certainly interesting. But be careful not to overstate pluralities and treat them as majorities.

For example, Trae Young received the most votes for "most overrated player." But he got just eight votes. That doesn't say much. Even among the 54 players who responded to that question, more than 85% picked someone other than Young.

Still, 37 players (of 90 voting players, 41%) saying they'd least like to fight James Johnson is certainly eye-opening. Especially because he's not a player who warrants much thought otherwise.

I'd also like to know who picked Tracy McGrady as the greatest player of all-time.

-Dan Feldman

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.