Freethrows - #3 in your list is not quite right. There must be 5 players whose combined salaries must not exceed $400,000. i.e., the lowest paid 5 players can't get more than $400,000, collectively.

Also, it was never clear if it was the actual salaries that would be used to police all of these rules, or the deemed market values of each player, as determined by some committee NBL was going to convene. IIRC, it was those market values that were going to be published, not the actual salaries.

Nonetheless, your point stands. AFAIK, there's been neither announcements nor press releases to suggest the committee ever was convened nor publicatino of players' market values, as promised.

For those interested, you can probably find the original press release on the new rules in the NBL news archive. It was released on 30 March 2016.

PeterJohn, you're correct in the assumption that it's the bottom five players that count toward 400K max of a team's salary cap. The NBL actually wrote it "any five players", as I did in my previous post. It was very badly worded and organised. It was also not clear whether it was actual or deemed market value that would be used.

I remember being bemused by the lack of clarity at the time, and I now think the whole thing is a farce and won't be acted upon at all. I don't think Kestelman has any desire for parity in the league.

Sydney 3 rounds in and still without a full roster

"Sydney 3 rounds in and still without a full roster"


Yet how many try & bitch about our salary?? lmao....

Freethrows - I wouldn't say 'farce', more a smokescreen to get more imports into the league and bring back some high-profile Australians from overseas. That worked.

I don;t know if Kestleman cares about parity. I think he just wants a product he can sell to the public and so to the media and so make some money. If the makes lots of money, all teams and owners get to share the spoils. A side effect might be parity of opportunity for success.

So far, things are going well. Pre-season interest was high and positive, crowds are big and the games themselves have been terrific. Kestleman may be right. It'd be nice if he is.

the NBL has a base salary that they give each player. the base salaries of a club mustnt exceed the cap.So for example Bairstow could be deemed to be a 200K player.In that case only the amount that the NBL deems(200k) counts against the cap. In reality the club can pay That player way more. So some teams have players that count 150-200K against the cap but are actaully getting paid double that.

Its kinda like the old point system. As long as the NBA deemed value of a player fits inside the cap then what they actually get paid can be different. There are some guys on 2-3 times there deemed value.

That's incorrect, will. The higher of the two numbers is what counts against the cap.

The Mock would LOVE a geek at what salaries these boys are making, but wheree is this information to be found?

What about COWARDS who hide in anonymity hey?

I read an article a while ago explaining the whole thing, which said the number that counted against the cap would be either the value assessed by the league, or the amount actually earned, whichever is higher.

Which makes sense. You can't get around the cap by underpaying players (or paying them under the table), but you also can't overspend on guys to lure them away from teams with less money available.

Thanks, KR. Do you have a link to the article you read?

Does anyone know how I can contact the NBL's head office for a quote?