I like the fact that we will know how much players are being paid. As much as it is part of your private life, it is consistent with other sports.

What does this mean :

9. Aggregate salaries of at least 5 players on each team must not exceed $400,000 in 2016/17.

Wouldn't that make it impossible to have a roster of 11 equal any more than $880k?

alexkrad, no, they mean a designated 5. So, you'd have 5 cheap players for $400k and then the rest of your team could be $1m. But you have to have some lower end players.

Not sure what the strategy is as it seems a bit oblique, but maybe trying to keep positions for rookies and role players? Or maintain a bit of disparity between the best and worst in a team? Theoretically, a broader gap between the best and worst in a team should lead to highlights.

I cant see this bringing in a significant amount of talent outside of the imports going to 3. Maybe bring a couple Europe guys back. I think you will see more "Blanchfield" situations in the next month than overseas Aussies coming back and the guys who are already here getting pay rises.

Isaac, right that makes sense now.

Also I think this may go under the radar abit. Development players up to 25yo AND can play home and away games. Is this within the 11 man squad or will it be like home games? 11 man squad + 2 development players?

Pretty sure development players salary doesn't count against the cap?

So could you get Drmic for example and pay him $150k and have him as a development player that plays every game but doesn't count towards the cap?

Trust the Perth fan to theorise a loop hole already..

Quick thoughts:

Hard to quickly judge what these will mean and how they'll be inevitably exploited. On the other hand, things are already exploited so maybe it hardly matters, in which case why complicate it?

Salary floor is $990k which is probably above what some teams have spent in recent years
Glad there's a luxury tax but it needs to have some bite.
Hope their calculations on determining the cap and taxes don't create a runaway situation
Not sure if dev player age should rise - shouldn't it encourage fresh rookies?
Are salaries disclosed, or the "player values"?
They ditch the points cap, but add "player values for salary cap purposes" which the points values have essentially been at varying points - gets them the "points cap abolished" headline, but retains the confusion, surely?
Do they need the marquee player rules PLUS the $400k thing PLUS luxury tax?

Here's their info on marquee players:

This will mean that any non-restricted (local) player may be nominated by a team as its marquee player, meaning that only the first $150,000 of that player's salary will be counted toward that team’s salary cap, a move that for the first time sees Australian players being acknowledged by the NBL as some of the best in the world.

Any team may replace any one or more of its restricted player entitlements with an additional non-restricted marquee player, with the salary cap amount increasing by $50,000 for each additional marquee player. (i.e. $200,000 of a team’s second marquee player’s salary would be counted toward the salary cap, $250,000 for the third and $300,000 for the fourth).

So does that mean if you have 2 Marquee Non Restricted players, you would only be allowed 2 imports?

Train, that's my reading, yes. Total of marquee players and imports is 4. Maximum imports 3.

I would like to be a spud sitting on the bench for at $80k a season. Stupid idea.

Can anyone clear up the part about player salaries? Are the actual salaries to be made public, or do we just see what the 'committee' deems to be their value, regardless of what they're actually being paid?

What I don't like about the 'committee' thing is that it's well known that players for some teams take lower salaries to be part of a championship contender. This $400k for your bottom 5 players is based on what someone thinks someone should be paid, so it will potentially break teams up.

The PPS was flawed but it rewarded loyalty at least. I'd hope that this new system would take loyalty into consideration as well when determining a player's worth.

So is it less likely or more likely that an Asian player will be a marquee? You can't get 10 quality 'Asian' players in the league with not much money. Also is Andray Blatche Asian and Darren Ng not?

what's the limits of "asian". It will all depend on passports. Darren NG depending on what passport he holds would be an Aussie or something else.

What qualifies as "asian"?

It depends on how well you can use chopsticks

It all looks good to me until you get to the committee part...I can't figure out the purpose of them varying a player's actually.

If a player is accepting a salary that is less than what the committee says they are worth, surely that's just the equivalent to a loyalty bonus? Isn't it better that the clubs deal with it themselves, get the best deals they can afford and just pay the equalisation subsidy if they exceed the soft cap?

It's basically just the points cap, except using dollars, the way I understand it.

So 44 countries that make up FIBA Asia include (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIBA_Asia)

Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Tajikistan
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
China
Chinese Taipei
North Korea
Hong Kong
Japan
Macau
Mongolia
Bahrain
Kuwait
Oman
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Bhutan
India
Maldives
Nepal
Pakistan
Sri Lanka
Brunei
Cambodia
Indonesia
Laos
Malaysia
Myanmar
Philippines
Singapore
Thailand
Vietnam
Iran
Iraq
Jordan
Lebanon
Palestine
Syria
Yemen

And here are 6 standout FIBA Asia palyers from 2015.

http://www.fiba.com/news/six-standout-players-so-far-at-2015-fiba-asia-championship

Kober = Correct!

The "salary committee" is obviously a complete pile of crap, but it is necessary because contrary to what they claim they can NOT disclose player's salaries. Apart from facing a player revolt, it probably violates about a millions privacy and fair work provisions.
So basically they have gotten rid of the points system, and the actual salary cap, and merged in into one. So instead of a player being rated at 10 points, he'll be rated at "$150k"
One can only hope they actually do a better job of it, otherwise it's going to be hard explaining how Nevill and Ogilvy were rated at the same salary.

It also means that the "salary floor" is completely meaningless.
They'll still let Crocs & Snakes pay under, but the players RATED salaries will be higher.

I like it but as mentioned above, I don't just want it to be a springboard for existing players to earn heaps more. Talent needs to be sourced from outside.

If all the cap changes are going to do is give a lot more money to players who teams can already afford, it will only benefit the players to the detriment of the club.

Some existing players will be licking their lips but here's hoping teams and club management exercise common sense and restraint.

Idea for United sign some 7'3 or higher Chinese dude to rebound!!

Hamed Haddadi would be an ok pickup for an NBL team

"it's well known that players for some teams take lower salaries to be part of a championship contender."

I'm pretty sure that's not an NBL thing, players wouldn't earn enough from an NBL career to set themselves up for life and an NBL championship is not that prestigious.

A few of Perth's guys are reportedly playing for below what they could get elsewhere.

They're not going to set themselves up for life either way, why go to a basketcase like Sydney for just a little more money?

Well, some major changes in thinking here, not sure how it will work but I do like the forward thinking and decisiveness following on from last season.

Now, just put in place a 5 game final series and we can all be happy. Maybe not DAZZ, but most of us...

:)

Boston Celtics at the moment will have 5 second round draft picks. Image the Wildcats offering three spots for them and get the Celtics to fund the process.

So they can get the next Deandre Daniels and Marcus Thornton? I imagine their playoff streak will end!

The new changes won't make a difference to overseas players who are offered big money contracts. Its just all hype to keep interest in the NBL going leading into RIO and 2016/17 season.

And as usual they are people jumping on the nbl bandwagon via social media congratulating Jeremy Lonelier and LK talking #Worldclass #Newheights #hardball.

#SeriouslySuckingUp

One can only hope they actually do a better job of it, otherwise it's going to be hard explaining how Nevill and Ogilvy were rated at the same salary.

LK gonna send the league broke. No way more than a few teams will be able to keep up with this spending year after year. It might work for a year or two but it will be fools gold.

I'd love nothing more than for Australia's best non nba talent and fringe nba imports to be all over the league, but it's just not sustainable

Done having your whine, Rodger? Some of us can see the positive in the... well... positive

Cram - do you not think teams weren't consulted before this change?

You have your right to your opinion. But it's very one-eyed.

"Player Values for Salary Cap purposes to be assigned by Contract Review Committee"

I wonder if these values are merely an adjustment due to cost of living/housing. For example Sydney accommodation and housing is far more expensive than it would be in Cairns or Townsville so a players salary may be more of value in some markets than it would in others.

From memory, doesn't the AFL or NRL have something similar in place.

Was anyone consulted before LK killed the Melbourne Tigers?

He has a history of doing what he wants and everyone else be dammed.

The facts are though, that history shows when teams have gotten into these arms races, everybody loses.

'So instead of a player being rated at 10 points, he'll be rated at "$150k"'

I didn't read anything in the release about an upper limit on player salary ratings. No upper limit would fix one criticism of the points' system. There's also nothing about how those ratings will be determined and whether they'll be subject to appeal or review, have loyalty discounts or be fixed during multi-year contracts, indexed to salary cap inflation etc. It'll be very interesting to see what the first set of published ratings will be.

This approach creates an interesting dynamic. Would any club ever consider paying a player less than their rated salary? And will there be a minimum salary rating (the equivalent of the old 1 point player)?

The 'arms race' issue is a potential problem but may not be as big a problem as first thought. The total salary spend of all 8 teams would need to exceed $8.8m for the cap to move up after next season. Posts above suggest at least 2 clubs would have spent over the new cap in 2015-16 and 2 probably spent under the new floor. For argument's sake, assume the remaining 4 teams all would spend at the salary cap. So the overspending teams would need to exceed the cap by at least $220,000 for the total spend to be $8.8m or more.

Then for every additional $150,000 that total increases, the cap would rise by $18,750 (about 1.7%) in the following year. That's the same as the annual inflation rate to December 2015 (www.abs.gov.au). In other words, the two overspending teams would need to exceed the salary cap by a total of $370,000 for the cap to keep pace with inflation. Anyone have a good idea of how much those two teams would have exceeded the $1.1m cap last season?

It'll be very interesting to see what the first set of published ratings will be.

Cram, LK would be propping up most teams bar Perth anyway.

It seems like there will be a lot of imports in the league over the next few years.

Guys like Holt qualifying as Asian.

The 3 import rule will allow more of a buffer on performance for some imports and we will see more players naturalise.

Australian players will need to up their level of play if they want minutes.